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. Juan MIELES, Appellant.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kreindler, J.), rendered December 20, 1996, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Prior to jury selection, the defendant signed a waiver giving up his right to be present during sidebar conferences in which prospective jurors were questioned about their qualifications. On this appeal, the defendant alleges that he was denied his right to be present at all material stages of the trial because he was not present at the sidebar conferences when the attorneys informed the trial court of challenges for cause and peremptory challenges. Contrary to the defendant's contention, we find that the defendant was not denied his right to be present at all material stages of the trial (see, People v. Velasco, 77 N.Y.2d 469, 568 N.Y.S.2d 721, 570 N.E.2d 1070). While the defendant was not present at the sidebar conference when challenges were discussed, he was present during voir dire and when the challenges were effectuated in open court (see, People v. Velasco, supra; People v. Kaur, 204 A.D.2d 573, 612 N.Y.S.2d 66).
The defendant's challenges to the prosecutor's summation are unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05[2]; People v. Simms, 222 A.D.2d 622, 636 N.Y.S.2d 631). In any event, any error in the prosecutor's summation was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt (see, People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 367 N.Y.S.2d 213, 326 N.E.2d 787).
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 19, 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)