NY appeals court orders new trial for defendant seeking to represent himself

In a split decision, the New York State Court of Appeals has granted a new trial in an assault case after the trial judge denied the defendant’s request to represent himself.

Defendant Laquawn Lewis was convicted in October 2018 of first-degree robbery, second-degree robbery, first-degree assault, second-degree assault, and second-degree obstructing governmental administration.

More than once before his trial, Lewis told the judge he wanted to represent himself.

The judge was required to make a “searching inquiry into defendant’s unequivocal and timely request to proceed pro se, to determine whether that request was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent,” Judge Jenny Rivera wrote for the Court of Appeals.

“Contrary to that rule, the court immediately denied defendant’s request without inquiry, and it expressly refused to consider any further request until the day of trial,” she wrote.

“The court’s failure to inquire into defendant’s request violated his constitutional right to self-representation. Therefore, we reverse and grant defendant a new trial,” Rivera wrote.

Before the trial, the prosecutor made a plea offer of a sentence of 16 years in prison and five years of post-release supervision if Lewis pleaded guilty. The offer was based on a belief that, if convicted at trial, Lewis would face a potential life sentence as a persistent felony offender.

Lewis accepted the deal, but his attorney subsequently realized that Lewis could not have been sentenced as a persistent felony offender if convicted.

Lewis withdrew the plea and told the judge he wanted to represent himself.

The day before jury selection was scheduled to begin, Lewis’s defense counsel made an application to be relieved because Lewis threatened to kill him, he said.

“Passions do run high when a trial’s about to start, and things are said, but your application to be relieved is most respectfully denied. I want to move this case, and move this case expeditiously, so your application is denied,” the judge said.

The next morning, the judge took a statement, on the record, from a court officer who claimed that Lewis also had threatened him. Based on the two reported threats, the judge ordered Lewis handcuffed during trial.

The jury acquitted Lewis of attempted murder, but he was convicted of all other charges. He was sentenced to 25 years in prison and five years post-release supervision.

The Appellate Division affirmed the convictions. The court held that the lower court did not violate defendant’s right to self-representation, because “his requests to proceed pro se, which were made in the context of his claim of dissatisfaction with counsel, were not unequivocal.”

“We conclude that the court violated defendant’s right to self-representation when it denied, without the requisite inquiry, his unequivocal request to proceed pro se … We  remit this matter for a new trial on the offenses for which defendant was convicted.” Rivera wrote.

Judge Madeline Singas dissented.

“I agree with the majority that defendant said the words ‘I would like to represent myself.’ I cannot agree, however, that, considered in context, these words expressed any sincere desire to forgo his right to counsel and act as his own attorney,” Singas wrote.

“The record here is clear that defendant’s request lacked the indicia of genuineness that this Court has, until today, faithfully considered,” Singas wrote.

“It defies reason that the majority, viewing defendant’s request and this record through the lens of our precedent — and common sense — could conclude that it was serious and unequivocal,” Singas wrote.

[email protected] / (585) 232-2035