People v. Knight

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Knight

6 A.D.3d 460, 773 N.Y.S.2d 887

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

DecidedApril 5, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 6 A.D.3d 460 (People v. Knight) 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. Knight, 6 A.D.3d 460, 773 N.Y.S.2d 887 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Reichbach, J.), rendered February 20, 2002, convicting him of attempted murder in the second degree, assault in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and bail jumping in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, he knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to be present during sidebar questioning of prospective jurors (see People v Antommarchi, 80 NY2d 247 [1992]). Such waiver was evidenced by defense counsel’s statement in court regarding the defendant’s waiver, the defendant’s acknowledgement of his waiver during the court’s inquiry of him, and his execution of the written waiver form (see People v Velasquez, 1 NY3d 44 [2003]; People v Tappin, 264 AD2d 449 [1999]). Altman, J.P., Florio, Luciano and Mastro, 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 Supreme Court, Kings County (Reichbach, J.), rendered February 20, 2002, convicting him of attempted murder in the second degree, assault in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and bail jumping in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, he knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to be present during sidebar questioning of prospective jurors (see People v Antommarchi, 80 NY2d 247 [1992]). Such waiver was evidenced by defense counsel’s statement in court regarding the defendant’s waiver, the defendant’s acknowledgement of his waiver during the court’s inquiry of him, and his execution of the written waiver form (see People v Velasquez, 1 NY3d 44 [2003]; People v Tappin, 264 AD2d 449 [1999]). Altman, J.P., Florio, Luciano and Mastro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 A.D.3d 460, 773 N.Y.S.2d 887, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-knight-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack