People v. Hicks

— Judgment unanimously modified on the law and as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, and as modified affirmed, in accordance with the following memorandum: Defendant expressed dissatisfaction to the trial court over perceived inadequacies of his trial counsel but the record shows that he requested a prompt trial date, not a substitution of counsel. The trial was held shortly thereafter. We do not find that defendant was deprived of meaningful representation at trial (see, People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147), but we note with concern that all of defendant’s pretrial motions were…