From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Toomer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
May 10, 2000
272 A.D.2d 990 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

May 10, 2000.

Appeal from Judgment of Monroe County Court, Maloy, J. — Robbery, 1st Degree.

Judgment unanimously affirmed.

Before: Pigott, Jr., P.J., Pine, Scudder and Kehoe, JJ.


Memorandum:

County Court properly exercised its discretion in conducting the trial in defendant's absence ( see, People v. Walker, 254 A.D.2d 824, lv denied 92 N.Y.2d 1055). The record establishes that the court on two occasions advised defendant of the scheduled trial date and warned him that the trial would proceed in his absence if he failed to appear. When defendant failed to appear, the court conducted a sufficient inquiry into the circumstances to warrant its conclusion that defendant's absence was voluntary ( see, People v. Barraza, 214 A.D.2d 943, 944, lv denied 87 N.Y.2d 844; cf., People v. Parker, 57 N.Y.2d 136, 141-142). Thus, the nonappearance of defendant on the scheduled date of trial constituted a waiver of his right to be present ( see, People v. Parker, supra, at 141; People v. Walker, supra).


Summaries of

People v. Toomer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
May 10, 2000
272 A.D.2d 990 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

People v. Toomer

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. DERRON TOOMER…

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

Date published: May 10, 2000

Citations

272 A.D.2d 990 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
708 N.Y.S.2d 652

Citing Cases

People v. Rios

"A finding that [a defendant] waived his right to be present requires, at a minimum, proof that he was…

People v. Brooks

The defendant contends that his due process right to be present was violated when the Supreme Court proceeded…