People v. Forney
Cases that cite this one
3 later published cases cite this decision.
- Forney v. Woods (2d Cir. 2009)
- Forney v. Woods (2d Cir. 2009)
- People v. Paulin (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (D’Emic, J.), rendered May 22, 2001, convicting him of sodomy in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and a new trial is ordered.
Where a defendant is found competent to stand trial, he is necessarily competent to waive his right to counsel and proceed pro se (see People v Ferguson, 248 AD2d 725 [1998]; see also People v Reason, 37 NY2d 351 [1975]). The Supreme Court improperly denied the defendant’s unequivocal and timely request to defend himself pro se, without conducting a proper inquiry (see Faretta v California, 422 US 806 [1975]; People v Arroyo, 98 NY2d 101 [2002]; People v Slaughter, 78 NY2d 485 [1991]; People v Smith, 68 NY2d 737 [1986], cert denied 479 US 953 [1986]; People v McIntyre, 36 NY2d 10,15 [1974]; People v Tejada, 289 AD2d 516 [2001]; cf. People v Venticinque, 301 AD2d 619 [2003]; People v Bell, 234 AD2d 378 [1996]). As the People correctly concede, the Supreme Court thereby denied the defendant his constitutional right to present his own defense, and the judgment must be reversed and a new trial ordered.
At oral argument the attorney for the defendant, in effect, withdrew the defendant’s claim that a new suppression hearing was warranted. Santucci, J.P., Krausman, Townes and Mastro, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.