People v. ApontePeople v. Aponte
The court properly found defendant competent to stand trial following a hearing. The court properly weighed the conflicting psychiatric reports and testimony, as well as its own observations of defendant, in concluding that the People had proven defendant’s competence by a preponderance of the evidence (see People v Mendez, 1 NY3d 15, 20 [2003]). There was clear evidence from two psychiatrists that defendant was able to understand the facts of the case, the charges against him and the roles of the various participants in the court proceedings (see People v Shiffer, 256 AD2d 818, 819 [1998], lv denied 93 NY2d 878 [1999]), and defendant’s own psychologist partially