Legal Opinion

People v. Cole

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided March 11, 1994PublishedCited by 3 opinions

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

  1. People v. SandovalNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
  2. People v. RegisterNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
  3. People v. DokesNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
  4. People v. FavorNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
  5. People v. FardanNew York Court of Appeals · 1993

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. People v. GrayAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
  2. People v. DiMartinoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
  3. People v. JonesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994

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

Powered by the Exa API