People v. Dickerson
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
Defendant was not entitled to be present at the side-bar conference held to determine whether his testimony "opened the door” to cross-examination about the underlying facts of a prior conviction previously precluded under a Sandoval ruling. The conference was not a material stage of the trial requiring defendant’s presence because the issue involved a purely legal discussion; it neither implicated defendant’s peculiar factual knowledge nor otherwise presented the potential for meaningful participation (see,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- People v. RodriguezNew York Court of Appeals · 1995
3Cited by8 opinions
- People v. YarboughAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
- People v. PageAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- People v. ArceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- People v. PoliteAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- People v. StewartAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.