Presiding Justice Karen Peters
Supreme court convicted Robles of first-degree burglary and first-degree robbery. As he was taken from the courtroom at the end of his trial’s second day, a deputy sheriff slipped a religious tract into Robles’ pocket. The tract exhorted Robles to forgo his right to remain silent and confess. The court denied Robles’ motion for a mistrial on the ground that the deputy’s actions constituted official interference with his decision whether to testify. Robles elected not to testify. In addition to rejecting Robles’ claims he was denied effective counsel and that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence, Third Department found the deputy’s “appalling conduct”—an attempt by law enforcement to interfere with a defendant’s free and unhampered decision to testify—triggered the court’s duty to discuss with Robles his decision whether to testify. The court fulfilled that duty. Its detailed colloquy was adequate to safeguard the sanctity of Robles’ fundamental right to testify and sufficient to ensure that his decision not to testify was an “unfettered exercise of his own will” untainted by governmental interference. Thus Robles’ right to a fair trial was not compromised, nor was reversal otherwise warranted due to the deputy’s indefensible conduct.
