Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Grant BELTON, Appellant.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Scarano, J.), rendered May 5, 1995, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts) and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that his right to be present during a material stage of the proceedings was violated when he did not attend two sidebar conferences after which two prospective jurors were excused by the court. The defense counsel's waiver of the defendant's right to attend the two sidebar conferences constituted an effective waiver of the defendant's right to be present (see, People v. Stokes, 216 A.D.2d 337, 628 N.Y.S.2d 156; People v. Spruill, 212 A.D.2d 381, 622 N.Y.S.2d 264). In any event, since the sidebar conferences related to the court's inquiry concerning matters which might lead to a juror's disqualification, such as physical impairments, family obligations, and work commitments, the defendant had no statutory or constitutional right to participate in the conferences as the disqualification of the prospective jurors prior to formal voir dire was a matter for the court (see, People v. Camacho, 90 N.Y.2d 558, 664 N.Y.S.2d 578, 687 N.E.2d 396; People v. Velasco, 77 N.Y.2d 469, 568 N.Y.S.2d 721, 570 N.E.2d 1070). Moreover, as the prospective jurors were excused by the court, the record negates the possibility that the defendant's presence could have had an impact on the outcome of the trial (People v. Maher, 89 N.Y.2d 318, 653 N.Y.S.2d 79, 675 N.E.2d 833; People v. Roman, 88 N.Y.2d 18, 643 N.Y.S.2d 10, 665 N.E.2d 1050).
The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: October 05, 1998
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)