| People v Morgan |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 03528 [72 AD3d 1482] |
| April 30, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Michael S.Morgan, Appellant. |
—[*1]
Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (Alex R. Renzi, J.), renderedNovember 15, 2006. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of course of sexualconduct against a child in the first degree and endangering the welfare of a child (two counts).
It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict ofcourse of sexual conduct against a child in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.75 [1] [a])and two counts of endangering the welfare of a child (§ 260.10 [1]). We reject thecontention of defendant that County Court erred in denying his request to represent himself."The request to represent oneself must be invoked clearly and unequivocally" (People v LaValle, 3 NY3d 88,106 [2004]; see People v McIntyre, 36 NY2d 10, 17 [1974]). Here, however, the solerequest by defendant to represent himself was equivocal because he made that request "as a wayof obtaining the dismissal of . . . assigned counsel. [Indeed,] defendant's. . . request[ ] to proceed pro se [was] made in the alternative [inasmuch as] hesought to represent himself only because [the c]ourt refused to replace . . . assignedcounsel[,] who had displeased him" (People v Gillian, 8 NY3d 85, 88 [2006]). Consequently, viewingdefendant's request in its immediate context and in light of the record before us, we cannotconclude that defendant made an unequivocal request to proceed pro se (see id.;LaValle, 3 NY3d at 106). Present—Smith, J.P., Carni, Pine and Gorski, JJ.