Filed Date: 3/8/1991
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/31/2024
Judgment unanimously reversed
We conclude that defendant’s request for a one week adjournment, under the circumstances of this case, should have been granted. While ordinarily the decision to grant an adjournment is addressed to the court’s discretion, "the refusal to hear any expert witness on behalf of defendant is a violation of the statutory requirement, not a matter of discretion” (People v Christopher, 65 NY2d 417, 425, rearg denied 65 NY2d 1054; People v Dobbs, 156 AD2d 990, Iv denied 76 NY2d 733). Accordingly, the court erred in denying defendant’s request for a one week adjournment to present psychiatric testimony at defendant’s competency hearing. Therefore, the judgment of conviction must be reversed and the matter is remitted for a new hearing to determine whether defendant is presently an incapacitated person within the meaning of CPL article 730 (see, People v Dobbs, supra, at 991). Following a hearing, if defendant is found to have such capacity, there must be a new trial (see, People v Christopher, supra, at 426; People v Dobbs, supra, at 991). In view of our determination, we do not address defendant’s remaining contentions. (Appeal from Judgment of Onondaga County Court, Cunningham, J.— Murder, 2nd Degree.) Present — Doerr, J. P., Boomer, Green, Balio and Davis, JJ.