Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Cruz v. Commonwealth

Court of Appeals of Virginia

Decided September 3, 1996No. Record No. 0749-95-4Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partAnnunziata, Judge

While I concur with the majority opinion that Cruz, by his action, waived his right to be present at his trial, I cannot join in the holding that trial properly proceeded in his absence.

An accused’s right to be present at trial is one of the most important and basic rights guaranteed by the Confrontation Clause, Illinois v. Allen, 397 U.S. 337, 338, 90 S.Ct. 1057, 1058, 25 L.Ed.2d 353 (1970), and must be carefully safeguarded. United States v. Beltran-Nunez, 716 F.2d 287, 290 (5th Cir. 1983). As the majority recognizes, the accused was not permitted at common law to waive the right to be…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Illinois v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. Taylor v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  3. Crosby v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  4. United States v. John Tortora, United States of America v. Samuel SantoroCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1972
  5. United States v. PetersonCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1975

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

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

Powered by the Exa API