People v. Williams

225 A.D.2d 642, 638 N.Y.2d 790, 638 N.Y.S.2d 790, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2161
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Williams. Read the opinion of the Court — 191 A.D.2d 989

Opinion

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, he was not deprived of his right to be present at a material stage of the trial. Although the defendant was absent during a sidebar discussion with a prospective juror, the sidebar at issue took place prior to the formal voir dire. At the time, the prospective jurors were only responding to a questionnaire given to them by the court which related to juror qualifications such as age and employment, and therefore the defendant did not have a right to be present at the sidebar (see, People v Antommarchi, 80 NY2d 247, 250; People v Velasco, 77 NY2d 469, 473).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review. Balletta, J. P., O’Brien, Altman and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Williams, 225 A.D.2d 642, 638 N.Y.2d 790, 638 N.Y.S.2d 790, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2161 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

225 A.D.2d 642 (People v. Williams) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Velasco
570 N.E.2d 1070 (New York Court of Appeals, 1991)
People v. Antommarchi
604 N.E.2d 95 (New York Court of Appeals, 1992)