People v. Peterson

151 A.D.2d 512
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 5, 1989
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 151 A.D.2d 512 (People v. Peterson) 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. Peterson, 151 A.D.2d 512 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Pitaro, J.), rendered May 14, 1986, convicting him, of assault in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The sole issue raised by the defendant is whether he was denied due process when the trial court proceeded to conduct a Sandoval hearing without him being physically present.

A criminal defendant’s constitutional and statutory right to be present during all material portions of the trial of an indictment (see, CPL 260.20; People v Mullen, 44 NY2d 1, 4-5) may be waived, either expressly or impliedly, provided that the waiver was knowing, voluntary and intelligent (see, People v Parker, 57 NY2d 136, 140; People v Hubener, 133 AD2d 233). In the instant case, defense counsel expressly waived his client’s presence at the beginning of the pretrial conference which encompassed the hearing, and participated in the hearing in the absence of the defendant without objection. Moreover, neither the defendant nor his attorney raised an objection or moved to reopen the hearing at any point in time subsequent thereto. Under such circumstances, it cannot be said that the defendant’s rights were prejudiced by his absence from the Sandoval hearing (see, People v Colombani, 22 AD2d 956, affd 16 NY2d 1055, rearg denied 17 NY2d 730; see also, People v Stoute, 140 AD2d 728). Mangano, J. P., Thompson, Sullivan and Balletta, JJ., concur.

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

Related

People v. Wuerfel
261 A.D.2d 561 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
People v. Lamb
235 A.D.2d 829 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Lynes v. Mitchell
894 F. Supp. 119 (S.D. New York, 1995)
People v. Dacosta
205 A.D.2d 551 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
People v. Favor
624 N.E.2d 631 (New York Court of Appeals, 1993)
People v. Lynes
197 A.D.2d 381 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
People v. Davis
194 A.D.2d 437 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
People v. Foust
180 A.D.2d 814 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
People v. Steans
174 A.D.2d 582 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
People v. Scott
163 A.D.2d 341 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
People v. Jenkins
157 A.D.2d 854 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
151 A.D.2d 512, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-peterson-nyappdiv-1989.