searching inquiry in New York

2026To make that evaluation, the court "'must undertake a searching inquiry designed to insur[e] that a defendant [is] aware of the dangers and disadvantages of proceeding without counsel'" ( People v Hall , ___ AD3d at ___, 2025 NY Slip Op 06727, *1-2 [internal quotation marks omitted], quoting People v Crampe , 17 NY3d at 481 ).

2026"To ascertain whether a waiver is knowing, voluntary and intelligent, a court must undertake a searching inquiry designed to insure that the defendant is aware of the dangers and disadvantages of proceeding without counsel" ( Baines , 39 NY3d at 6 [internal quotation marks and alterations omitted]; see Crampe , 17 NY3d at 481).

2026The fact that defendant's counsel was not relieved, but remained in a standby capacity, does not excuse the court's failure to conduct a searching inquiry ( see Smith , 92 NY2d at 521 ; People v Gray , 236 AD3d 1095 , 1096 [2025]; People v Navarro , 96 AD2d 1126, 1126 [1983]).

2026The fact that defendant's counsel was not relieved, but remained in a standby capacity, does not excuse the court's failure to conduct a searching inquiry ( see Smith , 92 NY2d at 521; People v Gray , 236 AD3d 1095, 1096 [2025]; People v Navarro , 96 AD2d 1126, 1126 [1983]).

2024Mindful that "there is simply no one-size-fits-all format for a searching inquiry" ( Crampe , 17 NY3d at 483), "we have eschewed application of any rigid formula and endorsed the use of a nonformalistic, flexible inquiry" ( Arroyo , 98 NY2d at 104).

2024Mindful that "there is simply no one-size-fits-all format for a searching inquiry" ( Crampe , 17 NY3d at 483), "we have eschewed application of any rigid formula and endorsed the use of a nonformalistic, flexible inquiry" ( Arroyo , 98 NY2d at 104 ).

2026Although "[a] 'searching inquiry' does not have to be made in a formulaic manner" (<i>Kathleen K.</i>, 17 NY3d at 386 ), "the record must demonstrate that the party was aware of the dangers and disadvantages of proceeding without counsel" (<i>DiNunzio</i>, 175 AD3d at 1083 [internal quotation marks omitted]; <i>see</i> <i>Matter of Pitkanen v Huscher</i>, 167 AD3d 901 , 902 [2d Dept 2018]).</p> <p>Here, the record reflects that the court failed to conduct a searching inquiry to ensure that the mother's waiver of the right to counsel was a knowing, voluntary, and intelligent choice (<i>see Gira

2024"In determining whether a respondent's waiver is made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently, the trial court is obligated to conduct a searching inquiry" ( id. [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Kathleen K. [Steven K.] , 17 NY3d 380, 385 ).

2025"Additionally, a searching inquiry encompasses consideration of a defendant's pedigree since such factors as age, level of education, occupation and previous exposure to the legal system may bear on a waiver's validity" ( Crampe , 17 NY3d at 482 ; see Blue , 42 NY3d at 591; Providence , 2 NY3d at 582-583 ).

2025Nonetheless, "[m]indful that there is simply no one-size-fits-all format for a searching inquiry . . . , [the Court of Appeals] ha[s] eschewed application of any rigid formula and endorsed the use of a nonformalistic, flexible inquiry" ( Blue , 42 NY3d at 592 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Providence , 2 NY3d at 583 ).

2026Defendant's request consisted of "equivocal and hesitant statements about proceeding pro se" (<i>Lewis</i>, 44 NY3d at 360) and thus, the court's duty to "make a searching inquiry . . . to determine whether that request was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent" was not triggered (<i>id. </i>at 352; <i>see generally McIntyre</i>, 36 NY2d at 17 ).</p> <p>Defendant's contention that his plea is invalid because the court failed to inquire about the voluntariness of his plea after he expressed dissatisfaction with defense counsel is not preserved for our review inasmuch as defendant failed to move e

2026Defendant's request consisted of "equivocal and hesitant statements about proceeding pro se" ( Lewis , 44 NY3d at 360) and thus, the court's duty to "make a searching inquiry . . . to determine whether that request was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent" was not triggered ( id. at 352; see generally McIntyre , 36 NY2d at 17).

2026Thus, there was no need for the court to have conducted a searching inquiry before commencing the trial ( cf. People v Lewis , 44 NY3d 350 [2025]; see Gillian , 8 NY3d at 88 ).

2026Thus, there was no need for the court to have conducted a searching inquiry before commencing the trial ( cf. People v Lewis , 44 NY3d 350 [2025]; see Gillian , 8 NY3d at 88).

2025Inasmuch as defendant's requests consisted of "equivocal and hesitant statements about proceeding pro se" ( Lewis , — NY3d at &mdash, 2025 NY Slip Op 03011, *4 ; see Gillian , 8 NY3d at 88 ; LaValle , 3 NY3d at 104-107 ), the court's duty to "make a searching inquiry . . . to determine whether [the] request[s] w[ere] knowing, voluntary, and intelligent" was not triggered ( Lewis , — NY3d at &mdash, 2025 NY Slip Op 03011, *1 ; see generally McIntyre , 36 NY2d at 17 ).

2022During a colloquy with the trial court, defendant referenced the -1- -2- No. 9 unsuccessful application to relieve his assigned counsel made at his prior appearance, and he renewed that application, claiming that counsel was “ineffective.” The court denied the application and rejected defendant’s renewed attempt to read aloud from what defendant had previously referred to as “my testimony.” Upon review of the record as a whole,* defendant’s retort, “I would love to go pro se,” immediately after the court’s denial of his applications “d[id] not reflect a definitive commitment to self-representa

2013The court’s failure to conduct a searching inquiry renders defendant’s waiver of the right to counsel invalid and requires reversal (see Crampe, 17 NY3d at 481-482 ; see also Allen, 99 AD3d at 1253 ; Lott, 23 AD3d at 1089-1090 ).

2013The court’s failure to conduct a searching inquiry renders defendant’s waiver of the right to counsel invalid and requires reversal (see Crampe, 17 NY3d at 481-482 ; see also Allen, 99 AD3d at 1253 ; Lott, 23 AD3d at 1089-1090 ).

2020In determining whether a waiver meets this requirement, the court must conduct a searching inquiry ( see People v Slaughter , 78 NY2d 485, 491 ) and impress upon the party the dangers and disadvantages of giving up the right to counsel ( see Matter of Kathleen K. [Steven K.] , 17 NY3d 380, 386 ).

2017To this end, the trial court is required to "conduct a searching inquiry' to clarify that [the] defendant understands the ramifications of such a decision" ( People v Stone , 22 NY3d 520, 525 [2014]; see People v Providence , 2 NY3d 579, 580 [2004]; People v Slaughter , 78 NY2d 485, 491 [1991]; People v Guarnieri , 122 AD3d 1078 [2014]).

2018"A searching inquiry' does not have to be made in a formulaic manner" ( Matter of Kathleen K. [Steven K.] , 17 NY3d at 386 , quoting People v Arroyo , 98 NY2d at 104 ; see Matter of Casey N. , 59 AD3d at 627 ).

2011In order for the court to ensure that the waiver of the right to counsel is valid, the court must conduct a searching inquiry of [the] party . . . [, and] there must be a showing that the party was aware of the dangers and disadvantages of proceeding without counsel” (Matter of Deon M. [Vernon B.], 68 AD3d 1740, 1741-1742 [2009] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Kathleen K. [Steven K.], 17 NY3d 380 [2011]; Matter of Casey N., 59 AD3d 625 , 627-628 [2009], lv denied 12 NY3d 710 [2009]).

2026"This requires that the trial court perform a searching inquiry to determine whether a party is aware of the dangers and disadvantages of proceeding without counsel" ( Matter of Clark v Clark , 101 AD3d 1394, 1395 [3d Dept 2012] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]; see Matter of Saber v Saccone , 192 AD3d at 1403 ).

2021This requires that the trial court perform a searching inquiry to determine whether a party is aware of the dangers and disadvantages of proceeding without counsel, which might include inquiry into the party's age, education, occupation, previous exposure to legal procedures and other relevant factors bearing on a competent, intelligent, voluntary waiver" ( Matter of Clark v Clark , 101 AD3d at 1395 [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]; see Matter of Angela H. v St.

2012Thus, “[t]he sentencing court erred by permitting defendant to represent himself at his ultimate sentencing proceeding” (People v Adams, 52 AD3d 243, 243 [2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 829 [2008]).

2012The court conducted no such inquiry in this case, and “[t]he sentencing court erred by permitting defendant to represent himself at his ultimate sentencing proceeding” (People v Adams, 52 AD3d 243, 243 [2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 829 [2008]).

2025At that court appearance, after the mother stated that she no longer wanted her appointed attorney to represent her, the court "failed to conduct a searching inquiry to ensure" that the mother's waiver of her right to counsel was "made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently" ( Matter of Mercado v Arzola , 212 AD3d 815, 816 ) and failed to sufficiently "warn [the mother] of the risks of proceedings pro se or apprise [her] of the importance of a lawyer in the adversarial system" ( People v Baines , 39 NY3d 1 , 7; see Matter of Cerquin v Visintin , 118 AD3d 987, 989 ).

2025At that court appearance, after the mother stated that she no longer wanted her appointed attorney to represent her, the court "failed to conduct a searching inquiry to ensure" that the mother's waiver of her right to counsel was "made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently" ( Matter of Mercado v Arzola , 212 AD3d 815, 816) and failed to sufficiently "warn [the mother] of the risks of proceedings pro se or apprise [her] of the importance of a lawyer in the adversarial system" ( People v Baines , 39 NY3d 1, 7; see Matter of Cerquin v Visintin , 118 AD3d 987, 989).

2024Contrary to the mother's further contention, the court advised her of the dangers of self-representation and conducted a searching inquiry to ensure that the mother's waiver of the right to counsel was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary ( see Matter of DiNunzio v Zylinski , 175 AD3d 1079 , 1082-1083 [4th Dept 2019]; Matter of Anthony K. , 11 AD3d 748, 749-750 [3d Dept 2004]).

2020As relevant there, "[t]he decision to permit a party who is entitled to counsel to proceed pro se must be supported by a showing on the record of a knowing, voluntary and intelligent waiver of the right to counsel" ( Matter of Anthony K. , 11 AD3d 748, 749 [2004] [citations omitted]; see Matter of Mitchell WW. [Andrew WW.] , 74 AD3d 1409, 1411 [2010]). "[T]he hearing court must perform a searching inquiry to determine whether a party is aware of the dangers and disadvantages of proceeding without counsel, which might include inquiry into the party's age, education, occupation, previous exposur

2024People v Kaltenbach , 60 NY2d 797, 798-799 [1983] ["The court's declarations—that defendant was entitled to be represented by a lawyer; that he was facing a serious charge; and that, if convicted, he could receive a year's imprisonment—did not satisfy the duty to make a searching inquiry"];1 [FN1] 0 People v Sawyer , 57 NY2d 12, 21 [1982] ["The court's declarations that defendant was 'facing a very serious charge' and that 'your own best interests are probably served by having a lawyer represent you' simply did not satisfy the duty to make a 'searching inquiry' "]).

2024Kaltenbach states, that "[t]here was no further colloquy regarding defendant's decision" ( id. at 798 [emphasis added]) and, "[t]he court's declarations—that defendant was entitled to be represented by a lawyer; that he was facing a serious charge; and that, if convicted, he could receive a year's imprisonment—did not satisfy the duty to make a searching inquiry" ( id. at 799).

2023When there is a basis to question a party's mental capacity, even if he has been found competent to stand trial, the court should consider that question as part of the searching inquiry designed to determine the efficacy of the party's waiver of counsel ( see People v Stone , 22 NY3d 520, 527 ; People v Brodeur , 55 Misc 3d 37, 39-40 [App Term, 2d Dept, 11th & 13th Jud Dists]).

2020To this end, trial courts must conduct a searching inquiry to clarify that [the] defendant understands the ramifications of such a decision" (People v Stone, 22 NY3d 520, 525 [2014] [internal quotation marks omitted and emphasis added]).

2001In particular, the court failed to conduct a searching inquiry designed to ensure that defendant understood his right to counsel and the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation (see, People v Smith, 92 NY2d 516, 520-521 ; see also, Faretta v California, 422 US 806, 835 ).

1988The court must conduct a searching inquiry into a defendant’s understanding of his right to be represented by counsel before permitting him to proceed pro se (Faretta v California, 422 US 806, 835 ; People v Sawyer, 57 NY2d 12, 21 , cert denied 459 US 1178 ).

2021Here, the Family Court failed to conduct a searching inquiry of the petitioner to ensure that her waiver of her right to counsel was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary ( see id. at 975-[*2]976; Matter of McGregor v Bacchus , 54 AD3d 678, 679 ).

2021Here, the Family Court failed to conduct a searching inquiry of the petitioner to ensure that her waiver of her right to counsel was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary ( see id. at 975-[*2]976; Matter of McGregor v Bacchus , 54 AD3d 678, 679 ).

2020As relevant there, "[t]he decision to permit a party who is entitled to counsel to proceed pro se must be supported by a showing on the record of a knowing, voluntary and intelligent waiver of the right to counsel" ( Matter of Anthony K. , 11 AD3d 748, 749 [2004] [citations omitted]; see Matter of Mitchell WW. [Andrew WW.] , 74 AD3d 1409, 1411 [2010]). "[T]he hearing court must perform a searching inquiry to determine whether a party is aware of the dangers and disadvantages of proceeding without counsel, which might include inquiry into the party's age, education, occupation, previous exposur

2018Thus, the hearing court must "perform a searching inquiry to determine whether a party is aware of the dangers and disadvantages of proceeding without counsel, which might include inquiry into the party's age, education, occupation, previous exposure to legal procedures and other relevant factors bearing on a competent, intelligent, voluntary waiver" ( Matter of Clark v Clark , 101 AD3d 1394, 1395 [2012] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]; see Matter of Madison County Support Collection Unit v Feketa , 112 AD3d at 1093 ).

2026"To ascertain whether a waiver is knowing, voluntary and intelligent, a court must undertake a searching inquiry designed to insur[e] that the defendant [is] aware of the dangers and disadvantages of proceeding without counsel" ( People v Stroud , 144 AD3d 1056, 1057 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v Brooks , 200 AD3d 904, 905 ).

2019We agree with the Supreme Court's determination granting the defendant's request to represent himself at trial. " Before allowing a defendant to proceed pro se, the court must determine that the defendant's waiver of the right to counsel is made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently'" ( People v Bristol , 102 AD3d 881, 882 , quoting People v Rafikian , 98 AD3d 1139, 1139 ). " To ascertain whether a waiver is knowing, voluntary and intelligent, a court must undertake a searching inquiry designed to insur[e] that the defendant [is] aware of the dangers and disadvantages of proceeding without

2025At that court appearance, after the mother stated that she no longer wanted her appointed attorney to represent her, the court "failed to conduct a searching inquiry to ensure" that the mother's waiver of her right to counsel was "made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently" ( Matter of Mercado v Arzola , 212 AD3d 815, 816 ) and failed to sufficiently "warn [the mother] of the risks of proceedings pro se or apprise [her] of the importance of a lawyer in the adversarial system" ( People v Baines , 39 NY3d 1 , 7; see Matter of Cerquin v Visintin , 118 AD3d 987, 989 ).

2025At that court appearance, after the mother stated that she no longer wanted her appointed attorney to represent her, the court "failed to conduct a searching inquiry to ensure" that the mother's waiver of her right to counsel was "made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently" ( Matter of Mercado v Arzola , 212 AD3d 815, 816) and failed to sufficiently "warn [the mother] of the risks of proceedings pro se or apprise [her] of the importance of a lawyer in the adversarial system" ( People v Baines , 39 NY3d 1, 7; see Matter of Cerquin v Visintin , 118 AD3d 987, 989).

2023Here, the Family Court failed to conduct a searching inquiry to ensure that the father's waiver of his right to counsel was knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently made ( see Matter of Lherisson v Goffe , 198 AD3d at 967 ; Matter of Means v Miller , 175 AD3d at 500; Matter of Rosof v Mallory , 88 AD3d at 802 ).

2023Here, the Family Court failed to conduct a searching inquiry to ensure that the father's waiver of his right to counsel was knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently made ( see Matter of Lherisson v Goffe , 198 AD3d at 967 ; Matter of Means v Miller , 175 AD3d at 500; Matter of Rosof v Mallory , 88 AD3d at 802 ).

2024People v Kaltenbach , 60 NY2d 797, 798-799 [1983] ["The court's declarations—that defendant was entitled to be represented by a lawyer; that he was facing a serious charge; and that, if convicted, he could receive a year's imprisonment—did not satisfy the duty to make a searching inquiry"];1 [FN1] 0 People v Sawyer , 57 NY2d 12, 21 [1982] ["The court's declarations that defendant was 'facing a very serious charge' and that 'your own best interests are probably served by having a lawyer represent you' simply did not satisfy the duty to make a 'searching inquiry' "]).

2024People v Kaltenbach , 60 NY2d 797, 798-799 [1983] ["The court's declarations—that defendant was entitled to be represented by a lawyer; that he was facing a serious charge; and that, if convicted, he could receive a year's imprisonment—did not satisfy the duty to make a searching inquiry"];1 [FN10] People v Sawyer , 57 NY2d 12, 21 [1982] ["The court's declarations that defendant was 'facing a very serious charge' and that 'your own best interests are probably served by having a lawyer represent you' simply did not satisfy the duty to make a 'searching inquiry' "]).

2026Although "[a] 'searching inquiry' does not have to be made in a formulaic manner" (<i>Kathleen K.</i>, 17 NY3d at 386 ), "the record must demonstrate that the party was aware of the dangers and disadvantages of proceeding without counsel" (<i>DiNunzio</i>, 175 AD3d at 1083 [internal quotation marks omitted]; <i>see</i> <i>Matter of Pitkanen v Huscher</i>, 167 AD3d 901 , 902 [2d Dept 2018]).</p> <p>Here, the record reflects that the court failed to conduct a searching inquiry to ensure that the mother's waiver of the right to counsel was a knowing, voluntary, and intelligent choice (<i>see Gira

2026Here, the record reflects that the court failed to conduct a searching inquiry to ensure that the mother's waiver of the right to counsel was a knowing, voluntary, and intelligent choice ( see Girard , 137 AD3d at 1590; Matter of Storelli v Storelli , 101 AD3d 1787, 1788 [4th Dept 2012]).

2023To that end, County Court was required to "conduct a searching inquiry to ensure that the defendant's waiver of the right to counsel [was] knowing, intelligent, and voluntary" ( People v Silburn , 31 NY3d at 150 [internal quotation marks, brackets and citation omitted]; see People v Crampe , 17 NY3d 469, 472-473 [2011], cert denied 565 US 1261 [2012]; People v Grays , 162 AD3d 1224 , 1226 [3d Dept 2018], lv denied 32 NY3d 1111 [2018]).

2020Defendant unequivocally invoked his right to self-representation and the searching inquiry conducted by the court established that he understood the dangers and disadvantages of proceeding pro se and the value of legal representation ( see People v Crampe , 17 NY3d 469, 481-82 [2011] cert denied 565 US 1261 [2012]; People v Wilcott , 168 AD3d 478 [2019], lv denied 33 NY3d 955 [2019]).