People v. Daly

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Daly

41 A.D.3d 861, 837 N.Y.S.2d 589

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

DecidedJune 26, 2007

StatusPublished

This text of 41 A.D.3d 861 (People v. Daly) 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. Daly, 41 A.D.3d 861, 837 N.Y.S.2d 589 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeals by the defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hollie, J.), both rendered April 18, 2005, convicting him of criminal trespass in the second degree under indictment No. 1160/04 and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree under indictment No. 1628/04, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

The defendant was not deprived of his right to be present during all material stages of the proceedings. He knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to be present during sidebar questioning of prospective jurors, as evidenced by the defense counsel’s statement to that effect in court, the defendant’s acknowledgment of his waiver during the court’s inquiry of him, and his execution of a written waiver (see People v Cahill, 2 NY3d 14, 55-56 [2003]; People v Velasquez, 1 NY3d 44, 49-50 [2003]). Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the court’s colloquy with him did not limit the scope of the detailed written waiver (cf. People v Ramos, 7 NY3d 737, 738 [2006]). Florio, J.P., Fisher, Carni and McCarthy, JJ., concur.

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

Appeals by the defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hollie, J.), both rendered April 18, 2005, convicting him of criminal trespass in the second degree under indictment No. 1160/04 and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree under indictment No. 1628/04, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

The defendant was not deprived of his right to be present during all material stages of the proceedings. He knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to be present during sidebar questioning of prospective jurors, as evidenced by the defense counsel’s statement to that effect in court, the defendant’s acknowledgment of his waiver during the court’s inquiry of him, and his execution of a written waiver (see People v Cahill, 2 NY3d 14, 55-56 [2003]; People v Velasquez, 1 NY3d 44, 49-50 [2003]). Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the court’s colloquy with him did not limit the scope of the detailed written waiver (cf. People v Ramos, 7 NY3d 737, 738 [2006]). Florio, J.P., Fisher, Carni and McCarthy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

41 A.D.3d 861, 837 N.Y.S.2d 589, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-daly-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack