Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant argues that the Supreme Court deprived him of his constitutional and statutory right to be present at a material stage of the trial and committed reversible error when it allowed the jury, at its request, to view certain trial exhibits in his absence. However, the delivery of the exhibits to the jury was a ministerial act and "[i]t cannot be said that the defendant's presence for [that] aspect of the trial had a...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.