Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Nate Fulton, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1994-03-11
Citations: 202 A.D.2d 1042
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Nate Fulton, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 202
Pages: 1042–1042

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Nate Fulton, Appellant.
[610 NYS2d 109]

Opinion:
—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: County Court did not err by imposing sentence upon defendant after he was removed from the courtroom. Although a defendant has the right to be present and heard at sentencing (CPL 380.40, 380.50), he forfeits that right by engaging in "obstreperous conduct" (People v Stroman, 36 NY2d 939, 940; see also, People v Herrera, 160 AD2d 416, lv denied 76 NY2d 789). The conduct of defendant at sentencing was sufficiently "obstreperous" to effect a forfeiture of his right to be present.
The contention that defendant's sentence is harsh and excessive is without merit. (Appeal from Judgment of Oneida County Court, Buckley, J. — Criminal Possession Controlled Substance, 3rd Degree.) Present — Balio, J. P., Lawton, Doerr, Davis and Boehm, JJ.