Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Reginald HESTON, appellant.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Knopf, J.), rendered September 5, 2007, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for further proceedings in accordance herewith.
The defendant's history of mental illness, and his behavior and comments to the court prior to the commencement of the trial cast serious doubt on his competence, and therefore the Supreme Court erred in denying defense counsel's repeated requests to have the defendant examined pursuant to CPL 730.30 to determine his fitness to proceed (see People v. Peterson, 40 N.Y.2d 1014, 1015, 391 N.Y.S.2d 530, 359 N.E.2d 1325). Moreover, in view of the passage of time and the lack of contemporaneous psychiatric reports of the defendant's mental condition at the time of trial, it would be futile to remit the matter for a reconstruction hearing to attempt to determine the defendant's fitness to proceed at that time (see People v. Hussari, 17 A.D.3d 483, 483-484, 794 N.Y.S.2d 64; see also People v. Hasenflue, 48 A.D.3d 888, 890, 851 N.Y.S.2d 674). Accordingly, the judgment must be reversed and the matter remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County for further proceedings on the indictment, subject to the Supreme Court's discretion or the motion of either party raising the issue of the defendant's capacity to proceed with the criminal proceedings (see CPL 730; People v. Hasenflue, 48 A.D.3d 888, 851 N.Y.S.2d 674; People v. Galea, 54 A.D.3d 686, 688-689, 863 N.Y.S.2d 695). If the Supreme Court “is of the opinion that the defendant may be an incapacitated person” (CPL 730 .30) it shall issue an order of examination.
The defendant's remaining contentions either are without merit or need not be reached in light of our determination.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: April 06, 2010
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)