People v. Cole
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We find no merit to the contention of defendant that her absence from the initial Sandoval hearing (see, People v Sandoval, 34 NY2d 371) deprived her of the right to be present at a critical stage of the trial (see, People v Dokes, 79 NY2d 656). Assuming, arguendo, that defendant was not present during the initial Sandoval conference, the subsequent colloquy conducted in defendant’s presence constituted a de novo hearing (see, People v Lanaux, 197 AD2d 908; People v Berger, 188 AD2d 1073, lv denied 81 NY2d 881; People v Smith, 186 AD2d 976, affd 82…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- People v. SandovalNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
- People v. RegisterNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- People v. DokesNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
- People v. FavorNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
- People v. FardanNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- People v. GrayAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- People v. DiMartinoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- People v. JonesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994