Opinion ID: 1315014
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: appellant's absence during proceedings

Text: The trial court's removal of the appellant from the courtroom after the return of the verdict and the polling of the jury but before the acceptance of the verdict by the court and the discharge of the jury was ill-advised. However, it was far short of reversible error. Under West Virginia law an accused must be present at all critical stages of criminal proceedings. State v. Boyd, W.Va., 233 S.E.2d 710 (1977). When a defendant is not present at a critical stage, the State has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that what transpired in his absence was harmless. Id., at syl. pt. 6. Both the State and the appellant agree that the only thing which happened in the appellant's absence was that the trial court thanked the jury for its service and complimented the performance of counsel on both sides. Hence, while we agree with the statement in the State's Brief that the trial court undoubtedly did not use the preferred procedure, we find that the action of the trial court was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt and, therefore, did not constitute reversible error. Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above the judgment of the Circuit Court of Kanawha County is affirmed. Affirmed.