Legal Opinion

People v. Cole

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

Decided June 7, 1991PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant contends that his statutory and constitutional right to be present at all critical stages of his trial was violated when the court, in the presence of counsel but in defendant’s absence, considered defendant’s Sandoval motion in chambers. The issue is not preserved for appellate review, and absent a showing of prejudice, we decline to reach it in the interest of justice (see, People v Dunbar, 172 AD2d 1006; People v Favor, 172 AD2d 1052).

We have reviewed defendant’s remaining contention and find it to be without merit. (Appeal from…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. People v. DunbarAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
  2. People v. FavorAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. People v. FavorNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
  2. People v. AlexanderAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
  3. People v. FavorNew York Court of Appeals · 1993

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API