Thalia stathis trial

Follow GR on Google News and subscribe here to our daily email! GR News. Greek News. All Archaeology Art Charity Crime. August 31, Her body was found wrapped in a blue sheet, the same color as the sheet police officers saw on the bed in her apartment on September 26, In contrast to this persuasive, albeit circumstantial, evidence that Thalia was murdered in New Jersey prior to defendant's arrest, there is no evidence that she was alive when taken to New York or that she was fatally injured in New York.

We are satisfied that an issue of territorial jurisdiction was not "clearly indicated" by this record. Further, giving the State the benefit of all testimony favorable to it and the favorable inferences that can be reasonably drawn from such evidence, we are satisfied that a reasonable jury could find beyond a reasonable doubt that the homicide occurred in New Jersey. Defendant argues that, although the charge was not requested, the issue was nonetheless presented to the court when defense counsel moved for a judgment of acquittal at the close of the State's case.

Defendant argued that the State failed to prove that Thalia was killed in Cliffside Park. The judge denied the motion, ruling there was sufficient evidence to permit the jury to find that the murder was committed in the Borough of Cliffside Park. Defendant did not argue that there was evidence to support a conclusion that the murder occurred in New York or at any location outside New Jersey. We are satisfied that this motion did not raise the issue of territorial jurisdiction before the trial court.

As noted earlier, in Denofa, the Supreme Court instructed that the issue of territorial jurisdiction should be raised as early as possible. Denofa, supra, N. Defense counsel's motion, made after the State had rested, cannot reasonably be considered to have been made as early as the state of the evidence on territorial jurisdiction was known.

Since defendant had to show "that no inference could reasonably be drawn placing the site of the crime" in New Jersey to prevail on that motion, ibid. However, the fact that such a motion was made merely identifies a defense strategy. Argument does not equate with evidence. Even if the motion was viewed as sufficient notice to the trial court regarding an instruction on territorial jurisdiction, there was no rational basis to conclude that there was a genuine factual dispute based upon the evidence as to where the homicide occurred.

Defendant next argues that a reversal of his convictions is required because his Sixth Amendment right to represent himself was violated.

We disagree. After the close of testimony on the second day of trial, the prosecutor asked the court to advise defendant that he should not be speaking in front of the jury and that he should communicate through his attorney and comply with appropriate courtroom decorum.

The judge addressed defendant, pointed out that he did get up and start to speak, and told him that he could not do that. When the judge stated he was not going to debate the issue, defendant said,. If that's the case, why don't you let me represent myself then? Because [counsel is] not doing the stuff I'm asking him to do anyway. So let me represent myself. I'm competent.

I -- I have a high school diploma. I -- I know how to read and I know how to write and let me -- cause there's questions that's not being asked. There's things that are not being said.

After explaining why he considered his defense deficient, defendant made six further requests to represent himself. The judge repeatedly stated he was just telling defendant the rules regarding courtroom behavior and called his counsel "extremely capable[. The judge stated,. If there was an application going to be made to represent yourself, it should have been done before trial and I would have considered it. Kalisch and he will be your attorney throughout the matter.

Defendant protested, reiterating that his counsel was not asking the questions he wanted him to ask. The judge again stated that Kalisch would serve as his attorney and advised defendant to contact the Public Defender's Office if there were issues communicating with Kalisch.

Defendant then interrupted the judge and asked, "So why can't I represent myself and he sit right here by my side[? A defendant "possesses both the right to counsel and the right to proceed to trial without counsel. DuBois, N. The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution grants "criminal defendants the right to proceed without counsel when they voluntarily and intelligently elect to do so. California, U. When a defendant makes an "unequivocal request for self-representation," the trial court is required to question the defendant to determine the scope of his request, State v.

Figueroa, N. Following that inquiry, the trial court "must determine on the record whether the defendant is seeking to exercise the right to self-representation in whole or in part. There is, however, "no constitutional right to partial or hybrid representation[,]" where counsel will continue to participate. Such representation is discouraged but may be granted in the court's discretion.

Even in the case where a defendant seeks to fully assume his own representation, the right to do so is not absolute. As noted, the defendant must voluntarily and intelligently decide to waive counsel and represent himself. Faretta, supra, U. Ed 2d. In addition, the request for self-representation must be made "in a timely manner.

Court of Appeal, U. The right of self-representation is not a license to disrupt the criminal calendar, or a trial in progress. A defendant cannot be permitted to place the trial judge in the unenviable dilemma where, in managing the business of the court, he appears to be depriving the accused of his right to self-representation.

Buhl, N. See also State v. Harris, N. Roth, N. Pessolano, N. He first made his request to proceed pro se after jury selection and "immediately before opening statements.

We concluded that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying his request. Here, defendant did not make any request to represent himself until the trial was underway and there had been two days of testimony. Defendant argues that this request was not untimely because the basis for his request - his dissatisfaction with his attorney's conduct of the defense - was unknown and unknowable to him prior to trial.

Messages: 14 Likes Received: 0 Trophy Points: 0. What in the world is going on with Long Island? It's Serial Killer Island. Messages: 9 Likes Received: 1 Trophy Points: 0. Messages: Likes Received: 15 Trophy Points: I must have missed where the FBI said they believe it is one killer. Link please? While I am open to the possibility of it being one killer or group of killers, I still strongly believe we are looking at 2 separate SKs.

SageRhiannon , Apr 1, I think if police took their time to comb the beaches and inlets and shrubberies along this ocean parkway more bodies could turn up. Messages: Likes Received: 1 Trophy Points: 0. P Dear 2NJ - say hi to Peaches for us!

Use of this web site in any manner signifies unconditional acceptance, without exception, of our terms of use. Powered by SMF 1. January 13, , AM.