People v. McClam
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
Defendant claims that at various times the court improperly granted, denied, or failed to rule on his requests to represent himself. We find all of these claims to be unavailing.
First, we reject defendant’s claim that the court initially granted his request to proceed pro se without making the required inquiry into his appreciation of the risks of self-representation (see People v Smith, 92 NY2d 516). The court’s brief indication that it would permit defendant to proceed pro se was of no consequence since the next event that transpired was a major in-court disruption during which defendant…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Payton v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- People v. McIntyreNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
- People v. SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1998
- People v. SlaughterNew York Court of Appeals · 1991
- People v. PaytonNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- People v. ChicherchiaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- People v. LittlejohnAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- People v. MercerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- People v. GillianAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- People v. RiveraAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.