People v. Sinistaj

In People v. Sinistaj, 184 Mich App 191, 201; 457 NW2d 36 (1990), the defendant was asserting his constitutional right to counsel, but claimed there was a breakdown of the attorney-client relationship. In denying the motion, the trial court determined the request was a dilatory tactic because it was made on the day of trial and there had been several prior adjournments. Based on those circumstances, the Court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motion for a continuance. Id., at 202. The Court also noted that the defendant had asserted no prejudice resulting from the court's denial of the continuance. Id.