From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. People

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 29, 1996
223 A.D.2d 732 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

January 29, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Finnegan, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant signed a written document stating that he waived his right to be present at sidebar discussions with prospective jurors, that he had a full opportunity to discuss this matter with his attorney and that he had signed the waiver "in open court, in the presence of this Court, and with the approval of this Court and with the advice and consent of his attorney". The document was also signed by the court and by defense counsel. Accordingly, the defendant's contention that he did not voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently waive his right to be present during sidebar conferences with prospective jurors is without merit ( see, e.g., People v McGee, 208 A.D.2d 388; see also, People v Epps, 37 N.Y.2d 343, 349-350, cert denied 423 U.S. 999).

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the remarks by the prosecutor were fair comment on the evidence and constituted legitimate responses to the defense counsel's summation ( see, People v Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396; see also, People v Ashwal, 39 N.Y.2d 105). Rosenblatt, J.P., O'Brien, Pizzuto and Goldstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. People

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 29, 1996
223 A.D.2d 732 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

People v. People

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ALFRED PEOPLE…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jan 29, 1996

Citations

223 A.D.2d 732 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
637 N.Y.S.2d 204

Citing Cases

People v. Tappin [2d Dept 1999

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed. We reject the defendant's contention that he was denied a fundamental…

People v. Tappin

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed. We reject the defendant's contention that he was denied a fundamental…