People v. Davidson
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
Upon direct appeal from his conviction for first and second degree robbery, defendant argued that he was deprived of his right to be present during voir dire questioning of prospective jurors (see, People v Antommarchi, 80 NY2d 247). Because the trial court had refused to record substantial portions of the voir dire proceeding, the Appellate Division remanded the case for a reconstruction hearing. The reconstruction court found that defendant was not present during several conferences with prospective jurors…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- People v. AntommarchiNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
- People v. FavorNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
- People v. RomanNew York Court of Appeals · 1996
- People v. MaherNew York Court of Appeals · 1996
3Cited by24 opinions
- People v. VelasquezNew York Court of Appeals · 2003
- People v. LuciousAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
- People v. LuciousAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
- People v. McCulloughAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- People v. BennettAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.