PEOPLE v. DILONE (2024)

Judgments, Supreme Court, New York County (Erika M. Edwards, J.), rendered September 6, 2018, as amended October 30, 2018, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree, and upon his plea of guilty, of bail jumping in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to consecutive terms of 11/212 to 3 years on each count, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant's failure to appear at the suppression hearing constituted a knowing and intelligent waiver of his right to be present at the hearing (see People v. Spotford, 85 N.Y.2d 593, 599, 627 N.Y.S.2d 295, 650 N.E.2d 1296 [1995]).  The court's failure to expressly mention “suppression hearing” in its Parker warnings (People v. Parker, 57 N.Y.2d 136, 454 N.Y.S.2d 967, 440 N.E.2d 1313 [1982]) did not render defendant's waiver of the right to be present invalid.  The court's statement that defendant had “the right to be present at [his] own trial” was accompanied by admonitions that, if defendant failed to appear, he would be “giving up [his] right to be present and to participate in [his] own defense,” “[t]he case would go ahead in [his] absence,” and he “could even be sentenced” in absentia.  These warnings reasonably conveyed to defendant that he had a right to be present at proceedings in “the case” beyond the trial itself.  There is no requirement that a court administering Parker warnings specifically name every trial-related proceeding encompassed by the right to be present.

The People established at the Parker hearing that diligent efforts were made to locate defendant, but without success.  Accordingly, the court providently exercised its discretion in proceeding with the suppression hearing and to trial in defendant's absence (see People v. Arellano, 291 A.D.2d 329, 737 N.Y.S.2d 854 [1st Dept. 2002], lv denied 98 N.Y.2d 694, 747 N.Y.S.2d 412, 776 N.E.2d 1 [2002]).

Defendant's excessive sentence claim is moot, as he has completed all components of his sentence, including parole supervision (see People v. Torres, 209 A.D.3d 541, 542, 177 N.Y.S.3d 18 [1st Dept. 2022], lv denied 40 N.Y.3d 952, 195 N.Y.S.3d 661, 217 N.E.3d 681, 682 [2023]).