Opinion
November 8, 1963
Present — Bergan, P.J., Gibson, Herlihy, Reynolds and Taylor, JJ.
Order denying application in the nature of a writ of error coram nobis affirmed. The form of the court's statement — that defendant was entitled to a lawyer of his own choice — was as explicit as that approved in People v. Fink ( 8 A.D.2d 859, cert. den. 361 U.S. 920). Further, defendant was asked if the court's statement of his rights was "clear" and, again, whether he understood his "right to a lawyer", and to each question he replied, "Yes, sir." Finally, the record compiled upon the hearing afforded defendant is sufficient to establish a competent and intelligent waiver.