Opinion ID: 1379313
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Defendant's Absence During Portion of Jury Selection

Text: (18) Defendant complains that a 20-minute portion of the jury selection proceedings was conducted in his absence. During the 20 minutes, 10 out of the 13 prospective jurors present were excused for hardship, by stipulation of counsel. Though the clerk's transcript indicates defendant was present, the reporter's transcript indicates that defendant's presence was waived by his counsel. Defendant claims that his presence could not be waived and, even if waivable by him personally, could not be waived by counsel. As a general rule, the accused is not entitled to be personally present during proceedings which bear no reasonable, substantial relation to his opportunity to defend the charges against him, and the burden is upon him to demonstrate that his absence prejudiced his case or denied him a fair and impartial trial. ( People v. Hovey (1988) 44 Cal.3d 543, 573-574 [244 Cal. Rptr. 121, 749 P.2d 776].) In People v. Grant (1988) 45 Cal.3d 829, 846 [248 Cal. Rptr. 444, 755 P.2d 894], the capital defendant declined to be present during the first half-hour of jury selection, at which time jurors were excused for physical disability or financial hardship. We said that defendant's presence would have served little if any purpose.... ( Ibid. ) The same is true here. Defendant speculates that had he been present, he might have assisted his attorney by objecting to the excusal of one or more of the jurors. His attorney obviously felt his presence would not be beneficial. As in Grant, no error appears.