People v. Lewis

Summary

The New York Court of Appeals held that the defendant waived his right to effective assistance of counsel through his repeated refusal to proceed with appointed counsel, refusal to represent himself, and disruptive absence from trial despite repeated warnings. The Court also held that consecutive sentences for simple weapon possession and possession with intent to use the weapon unlawfully were improper when based on the same act of possession. The Court modified the Appellate Division order accordingly.

Holdings

1. A defendant may waive the right to effective assistance of counsel by conduct. Under the circumstances presented, defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived that right by repeatedly refusing to proceed with his retained counsel, refusing self-representation, disregarding the trial court's warnings and explanations of his rights, directing counsel not to participate, and repeatedly leaving or refusing to attend trial.
2. Defendant waived his right to be present at trial through his repeated and deliberate refusal to attend after being advised of that right and the consequences of his absence.
3. Consecutive sentences are unlawful for simple possession of a loaded firearm and possession of a loaded firearm with intent to use it unlawfully against another when the offenses arise from the same act of possession. The sentences for counts 1 and 2 and for counts 3 and 4 therefore had to run concurrently.
4. The sentences for the two simple-possession counts, counts 2 and 4, must run concurrently, as conceded by the People.

Questions Presented

1. Whether defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to effective assistance of counsel through his obstructive conduct, refusal to proceed with existing counsel or represent himself, and refusal to attend trial.
2. Whether the trial court properly proceeded with the trial after defendant waived his right to be present and refused to permit counsel to participate.
3. Whether consecutive sentences were permissible for simple possession of a loaded firearm and possession of a loaded firearm with intent to use it unlawfully against another when both offenses arose from the same act of possession.
4. Whether the sentences for the two simple-possession counts arising from separate incidents could run consecutively.

Disposition

affirmed