From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Godley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 8, 1991
176 A.D.2d 505 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

October 8, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Rose L. Rubin, J.).


During this trial for possession of a weapon, defendant, who took the stand in his own defense, sought to testify as to his understanding why he had been denied parole. When the prosecutor objected on hearsay grounds, a bench conference was held, at which it was resolved that the questioning would continue, with the prosecutor permitted to introduce the written Parole Board report. After defendant had had an opportunity to read the report, the discussion continued in chambers, outside of the presence of the jury, where the scope of inquiry was sought to be limited.

Defendant's absence from the bench conference and brief discussion in chambers did not violate his right to be present at all material stages of the trial (see generally, People v Mehmedi, 69 N.Y.2d 759, rearg denied 69 N.Y.2d 985). The discussions held in defendant's absence were of a purely legal nature (People ex rel. Lupo v. Fay, 13 N.Y.2d 253, cert denied 376 U.S. 958), and were not, as defendant contends, tantamount to suppression (People v. Anderson, 16 N.Y.2d 282), or Sandoval hearings (People v. Rose, 175 A.D.2d 32).

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Milonas, Kupferman, Kassal and Smith, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Godley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 8, 1991
176 A.D.2d 505 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

People v. Godley

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. DAVID GODLEY, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Oct 8, 1991

Citations

176 A.D.2d 505 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
574 N.Y.S.2d 699

Citing Cases

People v. Rivera

Defendant concedes that she was present during the robing room Sandoval hearing, when argument was presented…

People v. Page

A defendant has no right under either CPL 260.20 or the Federal Due Process Clause to be present for sidebar…