Legal Opinion
People v. Brockenshire
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided October 1, 1993PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
—Judgment unanimously reversed on the law and indictment dismissed without prejudice to the People to re-present any appropriate charges under counts one, three, four and five of indictment to another Grand Jury. Memorandum: Defendant had an absolute right to be present at the Sandoval hearing (see, People v Sandoval, 34 NY2d 371) that was conducted in his absence (see, People v Cruz, 81 NY2d 738, 739; People v Beasley, 80 NY2d 981, 982, rearg denied 81 NY2d 759; People v Gebrosky, 80 NY2d 995, 996; People v Dokes, 79 NY2d 656, 662). Defense counsel’s consent to defendant’s absence does not…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- People v. SandovalNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
- People v. ParkerNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
- People v. DokesNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
- People v. GonzalezNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- People v. BeasleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Paul Clark v. James Stinson, SuperintendentCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2000
- People v. DennisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- People v. ClosureAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- People v. GeddisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2019
- People v. McMooreAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994