People v Mednan Redzeposki

People v Redzeposki 2006 NY Slip Op 04339 [7 NY3d 725] June 6, 2006 Court of Appeals Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, July 26, 2006

[*1] The People of the State of New York, Appellant,
v
Mednan Redzeposki, Respondent.

Argued May 2, 2006; decided June 6, 2006

People v Redzeposki, 21 AD3d 781, reversed.

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

Robert T. Johnson, District Attorney, Bronx (Jillian E. Wieder, Joseph N. Ferdenzi and Allen H. Saperstein of counsel), for appellant.

Legal Aid Society, New York City (Ellen Dille, Steven Banks and Laura R. Johnson of counsel), for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and the case remitted to that Court for consideration of the facts (see CPL 470.25 [2] [d]; 470.40 [2] [b]).

"Before proceeding in defendant's absence, the court should . . . ma[ke] inquiry and recite[ ] on the record the facts and reasons it relied upon in determining that defendant's absence was deliberate" (People v Brooks, 75 NY2d 898, 899 [1990]). Here, the trial court [*2]properly inquired into defendant's absence and reasonably determined—based on the court's own observation as well as defense counsel's explanation—that defendant had deliberately left the courthouse shortly before announcement of the jury verdict.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges G.B. Smith, Ciparick, Rosenblatt, Graffeo, Read and R.S. Smith concur in memorandum.

Order reversed, etc.