Legal Opinion

People v. Dickerson

New York Court of Appeals

Decided January 16, 1996PublishedCited by 8 opinions

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

  1. People v. RodriguezNew York Court of Appeals · 1995

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. People v. YarboughAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
  2. People v. PageAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
  3. People v. ArceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
  4. People v. PoliteAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
  5. 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.

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

Powered by the Exa API