| People v Gregory |
| 2019 NY Slip Op 04450 [33 NY3d 1017] |
| June 6, 2019 |
| Court of Appeals |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| As corrected through Wednesday, July 10, 2019 |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Kendel R. Gregory, Appellant. |
Decided June 6, 2019
People v Gregory, 163 AD3d 847, affirmed.
Paul Skip Laisure, Appellate Advocates, New York City, for appellant.
John M. Ryan, Acting District Attorney, Kew Gardens (John F. McGoldrick of counsel), for respondent.
Memorandum.
[1, 2] The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. The trial court concluded—based upon, among other things, its own observations of defendant's conduct throughout these lengthy proceedings and the testimony of defendant's attending physician—that defendant engaged in malingering insofar as he was competent to proceed but persisted in his efforts to avoid trial. Inasmuch as defendant "engaged in conduct which would prevent the fair and orderly exposition of the issues," we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's request to proceed pro se (People v McIntyre, 36 NY2d 10, 17 [1974]). Moreover, the existence of record support for the determination of the courts below that the pursuit of defendant by the police was justified by a "reasonable suspicion" of criminal activity forecloses our further review of that issue (People v De Bour, 40 NY2d 210, 223 [1976]; see People v Martinez, 80 NY2d 444, 447-448 [1992]).
Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Rivera, Stein, Fahey, Garcia, Wilson and Feinman concur.
[*2]On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, in a memorandum.