People v Freeman

Annotate this Case
People v Freeman 2010 NY Slip Op 05265 [74 AD3d 557] June 15, 2010 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, August 25, 2010

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
v
Rodney Freeman, Appellant.

—[*1] Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Carl S. Kaplan of counsel), for appellant.

Rodney Freeman, appellant pro se.

Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Yuval Simchi-Levi of counsel), for respondent.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berkman, J.), rendered October 31, 2007, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of bail jumping in the first degree, and sentencing him to a term of 12/3 to 5 years, unanimously affirmed.

After removing defendant for disruptive conduct, the court properly exercised its discretion in declining counsel's request for a recess to determine whether defendant could cease his outbursts and return to the courtroom. Given defendant's pattern of disruptive conduct, there was no reason to delay the trial further in the hope that his behavior would improve (see People v Branch, 35 AD3d 228 [2006], lv denied 8 NY3d 919 [2007]). Defendant did not preserve his argument that he was unconstitutionally deprived of an opportunity to reclaim his right to be present, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we also reject it on the merits.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). The jury properly rejected defendant's meritless excuse for failing to appear for sentencing on his burglary conviction (see Penal Law § 215.59 [1]). Defendant's related challenge to the court's charge is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we also reject it on the merits.

We have considered and rejected defendant's pro se claims. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Moskowitz, DeGrasse, Abdus-Salaam and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ. [*2]

Motion seeking leave to file supplemental reply brief granted.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.