Opinion ID: 2038479
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: People v Pondexter

Text: Defendant's murder conviction after a jury trial arose out of a botched robbery committed by defendant and an accomplice. After the two stole money at gunpoint from two male victims, defendant shot and killed one of the men when the victim refused to give defendant his house keys. The other victim survived and testified, as did a second eyewitness, Sharon Valdez, who claimed at trial to have seen the entire incident from her window overlooking the street. During the pretrial voir dire, the Judge asked the defendant if he wished to waive his right to be present at sidebars. The defendant, through counsel, initially indicated that he wanted to be present. The court then stated that if he's brought up to the bench there'll be a number of court officers surrounding him at all times. Defense counsel suggested that the court instead send the jury out, but the Trial Judge replied that I can't send 60 people out every time somebody wants to come up to me. After discussing the case further with his lawyer, defendant signed a written waiver. The day after Valdez testified and was cross-examined, defense counsel told the court in camera that he had spoken to Valdez ex parte after her testimony. Valdez told defense counsel privately  in sharp contrast to her incriminating testimony against the defendant  that she had been asleep on the night of the incident and did not see anything that occurred. Valdez's mother, Shirley Hudson, later testified for the defendant that her daughter had been asleep at the time of the criminal incident. On the following day, Valdez appeared in court with a court-appointed attorney. Both her attorney and Valdez indicated that she would assert her Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination in response to any further questions. The trial court ruled that Valdez had a basis to assert the Fifth Amendment and denied defense counsel's request to have her assert the privilege under oath in the presence of the jury. Defense counsel then requested that Valdez's testimony be stricken from the record. The trial court, however, denied the requested relief without comment or further inquiry. The Appellate Division affirmed defendant's conviction, and a Judge of this Court granted defendant leave to appeal.