State v. Hernandez
Citations
- 197 Conn. App. 257
Syllabus
The defendant, who had been convicted of assault in the first degree, appealed to this court. Following the defendant's conviction, the trial court scheduled sentencing and granted a motion filed by the state to increase the defendant's bond, reasoning that the defendant faced a substantial prison sentence and had a strong incentive not to appear at sentencing. Thereafter, the defendant posted his bond and the court granted his request for a thirty day continuance of his sentencing. The defendant subsequently failed to appear for sentencing on the date that he had requested, and the court sentenced the defendant in his absence. Held that the defendant could not prevail on his unpreserved claim that the trial court violated his constitutional right to be present at all critical stages of the prosecution when it sentenced him in abstentia: the defen- dant was unable to demonstrate that a constitutional violation existed because he waived his constitutional right to be present at sentencing by deliberately absenting himself from the proceedings, and, while the defendant's failure to appear for sentencing alone satisfied waiver, addi- tional evidence demonstrated that the defendant knew that he was required to be present at sentencing and knowingly and voluntarily relinquished his right to be present; the defendant specifically requested a continuance of sentencing, and at no point asserted that he was unaware that he needed to be present for sentencing or that he did not know when sentencing was scheduled, and, as the court articulated, the defendant demonstrated a cavalier attitude toward the sentencing process, leaving the court unclear as to whether the defendant would appear, and, accordingly, the court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's later request, made on the day of sentencing through defense counsel, to move sentencing back to later that day; moreover, the court did not improperly fail to make an express finding that the defendant had wai
Judges: Keller; Elgo; Pellegrino
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
1 case in this archive cites this case.
Cites
12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- State v. GoldingSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1989-12-19· cited 2,736×
- Stack v. BoyleSupreme Court· 1952-01-02· cited 1,157×
- Taylor v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1973-11-05· cited 580×
- State v. SiminoSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1986-06-03· cited 102×
- State v. BrownSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2006-08-15· cited 90×
- State v. GonzalezSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1987-12-29· cited 66×
- State v. DrakefordSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1987-01-20· cited 61×
- Talton v. WardenSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1976-08-10· cited 28×
- State v. DurkinSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1991-07-23· cited 15×
- State v. CrawleyConnecticut Appellate Court· 2012-09-11· cited 12×
- State v. VinesSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2004-03-23· cited 8×
- State v. VinesConnecticut Appellate Court· 2002-08-27· cited 8×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.