People v. Turaine
| Decision Date | 04 June 1991 |
| Citation | 78 N.Y.2d 871,577 N.E.2d 55,573 N.Y.S.2d 64 |
| Parties | , 577 N.E.2d 55 The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Ditain TURAINE, Also Known as Dittan Turaine, Also Known as Ditian Turaine, Also Known as Dhain Turaine, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
The order of the Appellate Division, 162 A.D.2d 262, 556 N.Y.S.2d 620, should be reversed and a new trial ordered.
On the day of defendant's jury trial one of the witnesses against him, who was being held on other charges, was mistakenly placed in the holding pen in the courthouse with defendant. During the trial, the prosecutor attempted to have the witness testify that while in the holding pen, defendant threatened or intimidated him to prevent him from testifying. Before receiving the evidence, the trial court conducted a hearing in the absence of the jury. Over objection, the court excluded defendant from the courtroom during the hearing. That ruling constituted reversible error.
A defendant has the right to be present at any material state of the trial (see, People v. Velasco, 77 N.Y.2d 469, 568 N.Y.S.2d 721, 570 N.E.2d 1070; People v. Mullen, 44 N.Y.2d 1, 4-5, 403 N.Y.S.2d 470, 374 N.E.2d 369). Proceedings where testimony is received are material stages of the trial because defendant's presence is necessary so that he or she may confront adverse witnesses and advise counsel of any inconsistencies, errors or falsehoods in their testimony (People v. Anderson, 16 N.Y.2d 282, 288, 266 N.Y.S.2d 110, 213 N.E.2d 445; and see, People ex rel. Lupo v. Fay, 13 N.Y.2d 253, 257, 246 N.Y.S.2d 399, 196 N.E.2d 56, remittitur amended 13 N.Y.2d 1178, 248 N.Y.S.2d 57, 197 N.E.2d 543, cert. denied 376 U.S. 958, 84 S.Ct. 979, 11 L.Ed.2d 976). A preliminary hearing at which adverse testimony is received may be a material part of the trial for similar reasons (see, People v. Anderson, supra, 16 N.Y.2d at 286-288, 266 N.Y.S.2d 110, 213 N.E.2d 445). Defendant's absence from such hearings could have a substantial effect on his ability to defend (see, Snyder v. Massachusetts, 291 U.S. 97, 105-106, 54 S.Ct. 330, 332, 78 L.Ed. 674).
The purpose of the hearing in this case was to elicit the witness's version of the facts surrounding the alleged intimidation so that the court could determine...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Perkins v. Herbert, 02-CV-6608(VEB).
......The prosecution moved for a Sirois hearing pursuant to People v. Geraci, 85 N.Y.2d 359, 625 N.Y.S.2d 469, 649 N.E.2d 817 (1995) ("the Sirois hearing") 4 seeking to have Cruz's grand jury testimony and two ...Resp't Ex. G at 209-10. After noting the New York Court of Appeals had held in People v. Turaine "a defendant's exclusion during a hearing to determine if a prosecution witness should be allowed to testify at trial that the defendant intimidated ......
-
People v. Hok Ming Chan
...... The court erred in conducting such an inquiry in the absence of defendants, particularly since they had "peculiar knowledge" about the identities of some of these people (People v. Dokes, 79 N.Y.2d 656, 660, 584 N.Y.S.2d 761, 595 N.E.2d 836; People v. Turaine, 78 N.Y.2d 871, 573 N.Y.S.2d 64, 577 N.E.2d 55), which presumably could have contributed to the resolution of the court's explicit concern about determining "who these people [were]" before making the decision to exclude them from the proceedings (People v. Sprowal, 84 N.Y.2d 113, 118, 615 N.Y.S.2d ......
-
People v. Favor
...... Page 500 . by CPL 260.20. We had held that the right includes the prerogative to be present at a hearing to elicit testimony from a witness about the accused's alleged intimidating conduct (People v. Turaine, 78 N.Y.2d 871, 573 N.Y.S.2d 64, 577 N.E.2d 55), at a rereading of a portion of the court's charge to the jury (People v. Cain, 76 N.Y.2d 119, 556 N.Y.S.2d 848, 556 N.E.2d 141), at pretrial hearings where factual questions are to be determined (People v. Anderson, 16 N.Y.2d 282, 266 N.Y.S.2d 110, ......
-
People v. Rivera
...... Also distinguishable is the proceeding in People v. Turaine, 78 N.Y.2d 871, 573 N.Y.S.2d 64, 577 N.E.2d 55, a determination whether to admit evidence that a defendant had threatened a witness, an issue where defendant's presence and participation could be of value, unlike the audibility hearing at bar. Defendant's reliance on People v. Shields, 82 Misc.2d ......