Legal Opinion
People v. Dean
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided December 30, 1992PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Judgment unanimously reversed on the law and new trial granted. Memorandum: Reversal is required because defendant’s absence from the in-chambers Sandoval hearing deprived him of his constitutional right to be present during all material stages of the trial (see, People v Dokes, 79 NY2d 656, 662; People v Beasley, 80 NY2d 981; People v Kirkland, 188 AD2d 1083 [decided herewith]). The fact that the court made its Sandoval ruling in defendant’s presence is insufficient to satisfy defendant’s right to be present at the Sandoval hearing (see, People v Gebrosky, 80 NY2d 995, revg 181 AD2d 692;…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- People v. DokesNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
- People v. BeasleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
- People v. GebroskyNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
- People v. EadyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- People v. GebroskyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- People v. RussellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- People v. KirklandAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- People v. FullerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- People v. YoungAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993