The court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant's request for removal of his counsel and for permission to proceed pro se. The court conducted an adequate inquiry of defendant's counsel. Further, the application was made after five of the People's seven witnesses had testified, and defendant did not establish "compelling circumstances" warranting a mid-trial change of status (People v McIntyre,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
PEOPLE v. JONES
277 A.D.2d 1 (2000)
715 N.Y.S.2d 402
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MARVEL JONES, Appellant.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Decided November 2, 2000.
Decided November 2, 2000.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.
