Legal Opinion
People v. Hicks
New York Supreme Court
Decided April 25, 1977PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtAllen Murray Myers, J.
CPL 260.20 provides that, "A defendant must be personally present during the trial of an indictment”.
The issue before me is under what circumstances, if at all, a defendant can waive his presence at trial.
On the morning of April 1, 1977, the case of People v Troy Hicks and Phillip Bermudez was assigned to me for trial in Part 102. The defendants were charged with the robbery of an after-hours club on December 21, 1975. When the case was called in Part 102, the Assistant District Attorney stated: "The People would move this case for trial.” Both defendants, through their respective attorneys,…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Illinois v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- United States v. WilsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Stack v. BoyleSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Diaz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- People v. ThomasNew York Supreme Court · 1978
- Whitley v. CioffiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
- People v. Chambliss, New York County Courts1980
- People v. FloresAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
- People v. AnglinNew York Supreme Court · 1987
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.