Gary F. Cohen v. Daniel A. Senkowski, Superintendent, Clinton Correctional Facility

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “the trial court’s actions in open court gave Cohen sufficient ‘minimal’ knowledge of the nature and purpose of the pre-screening procedure to conclude that he waived his right to be present”
• holding that ʺthe trial courtʹs actions in open court gave Cohen sufficient ʹminimalʹ knowledge of the nature and purpose of the pre‐screening procedure to conclude that he waived his right to be presentʺ
• finding implied waiver of defendant’s right to be present at pre-screening of jurors by acquiescence of defendant and his counsel
• distinguishing examination of prospective jurors about exposure to the defendant’s case, during which the defendant has a right to be present, from examination of prospective jurors about excusals for hardships
• distinguishing the “administrative empanelment process” from examination regarding potential bias from pretrial publicity
• distinguishing “substantive inquiry into juror qualification” from “an 18 administrative empanelment process”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).