Opinion ID: 1305836
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 19

Heading: Alleged Improper Cross-Examination of Williams

Text: The witnesses had been excluded from the courtroom when not testifying. Williams contends that the trial court erred in permitting the Commonwealth to ask Williams on cross-examination whether he was the only witness who had been present in the courtroom and heard the testimony of witnesses who had already testified. According to Williams, this question impermissibly burdened Williams' [constitutional] right to confront his accusers, to be present at all times during his trial, to present evidence in his favor and to compel process. However, Williams cites no case in which such a question has been held to violate a defendant's constitutional rights, and we find none. We fail to see how those rights are violated by a question that reflected what the jury already knew. Accordingly, we find no merit in this contention.