Legal Opinion
People v. Allen
New York Court of Appeals
Decided June 15, 1976PublishedCited by 73 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Memorandum. Order of the Appellate Term reversed and a new trial ordered.
Upon learning from court documents that defendant wished to represent himself without a lawyer, the trial court asked defendant whether he understood the charges against him. When defendant replied that he did, the court directed the People to proceed.
This summary and perfunctory disposition of the defendant’s constitutional right to counsel was insufficient to form the basis for a waiver. Such a waiver must be knowing and intelligent (see Carnley v Cochran, 369 US 506, 515; Johnson v Zerbst, 304 US 458, 464-465; Matter…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Carnley v. CochranSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- People v. McIntyreNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
- People v. ReasonNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
- People v. WitenskiNew York Court of Appeals · 1965
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by73 opinions
- The People v. Joseph Conceicao / The People v. Federico Perez / The People v. Javier SanchezNew York Court of Appeals · 2015
- People v. TyrellNew York Court of Appeals · 2013
- People v. RoopchandAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
- People v. LandyNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- People v. ArroyoNew York Court of Appeals · 2002
68 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.