| People v Stilts |
| 2011 NY Slip Op 05763 [86 AD3d 927] |
| July 1, 2011 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v BrandonStilts, Appellant. |
—[*1] John C. Tunney, District Attorney, Bath (Amanda M. Chafee of counsel), forrespondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the Steuben County Court (Marianne Furfure, A.J.), renderedApril 10, 2009. The judgment revoked defendant's sentence of probation and imposed a sentenceof imprisonment.
It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment revoking the term of probationpreviously imposed upon his conviction of rape in the second degree (Penal Law § 130.30[1]) and sentencing him to a determinate term of incarceration, following a hearing on the issuewhether he violated the conditions of his probation. We reject defendant's contention that CountyCourt erred in denying his request for substitution of counsel. The record establishes that thecourt "made the requisite inquiry to determine whether defendant had good cause forsubstitution" (People v Henderson,77 AD3d 1311, 1311 [2010]), and " 'thereafter reasonably concluded that defendant's. . . objections had no merit or substance' " (id.). The denial of a defendant'srequest for substitution of assigned counsel does not constitute an abuse of the court's discretionwhere, as in this case, "tensions between client and counsel on the eve of [a hearing] were theprecipitate of differences over strategy" (People v Medina, 44 NY2d 199, 208 [1978]; see People v Shorter, 6 AD3d1204, 1205 [2004], lv denied 3 NY3d 648 [2004]). We reject defendant's furthercontention that he was denied effective assistance of counsel (see generally People vBaldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147 [1981]). Finally, we conclude that the sentence is notunduly harsh or severe. Present—Scudder, P.J., Centra, Fahey, Lindley and Martoche, JJ.