Judgment establishing a conservatorship for appellant under the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act is affirmed over claims that the trial court: 1) improperly proceeded with his LPS hearing in his absence without satisfying conditions excusing his mandatory presence under Probate Code section 1825; 2) did not conduct on-record voir dire required by Probate Code section 1828; and 3) violated his state and federal constitutional due process rights because the court did not comply with the aforementioned statutory safeguards intended to minimize the risk of error, and consequently it did not have evidence from which it could reasonably determine he knowingly and intelligently waived his rights.