People v. Derti

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Derti

285 A.D.2d 611, 728 N.Y.S.2d 377, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7583

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

DecidedJuly 23, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 285 A.D.2d 611 (People v. Derti) 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. Derti, 285 A.D.2d 611, 728 N.Y.S.2d 377, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7583 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Paño Z. Patsalos, J.), rendered July 23, 1997, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree, and assault in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

[612]*612Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the record establishes that his waiver of his right to be present at sidebar discussions during voir dire (see, People v Antommarchi, 80 NY2d 247) was made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently (People v Keen, 94 NY2d 533, 538; People v McNeil, 267 AD2d 478; People v Tappin, 264 AD2d 449; People v Broadwater, 248 AD2d 719, 720; People v Stokes, 216 AD2d 337). In addition, the trial court properly dismissed as grossly unqualified a juror who admitted to being ill and “dozing off” during portions of the testimony of at least one witness (see, CPL 270.35; People v Rogers, 266 AD2d 481; People v Adams, 179 AD2d 764; People v South, 177 AD2d 607; People v Valerio, 141 AD2d 585; People v Russell, 112 AD2d 451). Bracken, P. J., Friedmann, Florio and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Paño Z. Patsalos, J.), rendered July 23, 1997, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree, and assault in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

[612]*612Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the record establishes that his waiver of his right to be present at sidebar discussions during voir dire (see, People v Antommarchi, 80 NY2d 247) was made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently (People v Keen, 94 NY2d 533, 538; People v McNeil, 267 AD2d 478; People v Tappin, 264 AD2d 449; People v Broadwater, 248 AD2d 719, 720; People v Stokes, 216 AD2d 337). In addition, the trial court properly dismissed as grossly unqualified a juror who admitted to being ill and “dozing off” during portions of the testimony of at least one witness (see, CPL 270.35; People v Rogers, 266 AD2d 481; People v Adams, 179 AD2d 764; People v South, 177 AD2d 607; People v Valerio, 141 AD2d 585; People v Russell, 112 AD2d 451). Bracken, P. J., Friedmann, Florio and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

285 A.D.2d 611, 728 N.Y.S.2d 377, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7583, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-derti-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack