People v. Rivera

• Decision Date: 24 March 1997
• Citation: 656 N.Y.S.2d 894,237 A.D.2d 539
• Parties: The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Luis RIVERA, Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 894

656 N.Y.S.2d 894

237 A.D.2d 539

The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Luis RIVERA, Appellant.

Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department.

March 24, 1997.

Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York City (David P. Greenberg, of counsel), for appellant.

Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn (Roseann B. MacKechnie and Ann Bordley, of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lipp, J.), rendered October 26, 1995, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (three 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.

We reject the defendant's contention that he was denied a fundamental right to be present at all material stages of the trial by his exclusion from numerous sidebar discussions with prospective jurors during voir dire (see, People v. Antommarchi, 80 N.Y.2d 247, 590 N.Y.S.2d 33, 604 N.E.2d 95; People v. Sloan, 79 N.Y.2d 386, 583 N.Y.S.2d 176, 592 N.E.2d 784). The record demonstrates that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to be present since, prior to the commencement of voir dire, his trial counsel informed the court, in his presence, that he had signed a waiver indicating that he was fully advised of his rights and that he agreed to waive his right to be present (see, People v. Yuen, 222 A.D.2d 613, 636 N.Y.S.2d 346; 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; People v. Perez, 196 A.D.2d 781, 602 N.Y.S.2d 113; see also, People v. Underwood, 201 A.D.2d 597, 607 N.Y.S.2d 955).

THOMPSON, J.P., and PIZZUTO, JOY and LUCIANO, JJ., concur.