Opinion
December 2, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Carey, J.).
Since defendant did not proceed "pro se", but merely "participated" in his defense to the extent of conducting a portion of the cross-examination of one of the People's witnesses, there was no relinquishment of the right to counsel and thus no need for the court to have inquired of defendant whether he appreciated the risks of self-representation (People v Cabassa, 79 N.Y.2d 722, 730-731, cert denied sub nom. Lind v New York, ___ US ___, 113 S Ct 633).
Defendant's other contention that the sworn juror was replaced over his objection misconstrues the record as showing that he objected to the disqualification. To the contrary, the record shows that defendant actually sought the disqualification when his motion for a mistrial, based on the juror's unavailability for continued service, was denied.
Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Wallach, Kupferman and Nardelli, JJ.