People v. Black

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Black

202 A.D.2d 990, 609 N.Y.S.2d 468, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3357

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 11, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 202 A.D.2d 990 (People v. Black) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Black, 202 A.D.2d 990, 609 N.Y.S.2d 468, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3357 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously reversed on the law and new trial granted. Memorandum: The People concede that defendant was not present when the trial court conducted an in-chambers Sandoval hearing. After that hearing, the court permitted the prosecutor to question defendant concerning the act underlying a prior robbery charge. Because his presence at that hearing would not have been superfluous (see, People v Odiat, 82 NY2d 872; People v Favor, 82 NY2d 254, 267; People v Dokes, 79 NY2d 656, 661), defendant was denied the right to be present at a material stage of the trial and a new trial is required (People v Dokes, supra). Under the circumstances, we do not reach the remaining issue raised by defendant. (Appeal from Judgment of Monroe County Court, Egan, J. — Murder, 2nd Degree.) Present — Green, J. P., Balio, Lawton, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Judgment unanimously reversed on the law and new trial granted. Memorandum: The People concede that defendant was not present when the trial court conducted an in-chambers Sandoval hearing. After that hearing, the court permitted the prosecutor to question defendant concerning the act underlying a prior robbery charge. Because his presence at that hearing would not have been superfluous (see, People v Odiat, 82 NY2d 872; People v Favor, 82 NY2d 254, 267; People v Dokes, 79 NY2d 656, 661), defendant was denied the right to be present at a material stage of the trial and a new trial is required (People v Dokes, supra). Under the circumstances, we do not reach the remaining issue raised by defendant. (Appeal from Judgment of Monroe County Court, Egan, J. — Murder, 2nd Degree.) Present — Green, J. P., Balio, Lawton, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

202 A.D.2d 990, 609 N.Y.S.2d 468, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3357, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-black-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack