California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Waidla, 22 Cal.4th 690, 94 Cal.Rptr.2d 396, 996 P.2d 46 (Cal. 2000):
Under the Sixth Amendment's confrontation clause, a criminal defendant does not have a right to be personally present at a particular proceeding unless his appearance is necessary to prevent "interference with [his] opportunity for effective cross-examination." (Kentucky v. Stincer (1987) 482 U.S. 730, 744-745, fn. 17, 107 S.Ct. 2658, 96 L.Ed.2d 631; accord, id. at p. 740, 107 S.Ct. 2658.)
Similarly, under the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause, a criminal defendant does not have a right to be personally present at a particular proceeding unless he finds himself at a "stage ... that is critical to [the] outcome" and "his presence would contribute to the fairness of the procedure." (Kentucky v. Stincer, supra, 482 U.S. at p. 745, 107 S.Ct. 2658.)
Under section 15 of article I of the California Constitution, a criminal defendant does not have a right to be personally present "either in chambers or at bench discussions that occur outside of the jury's presence on questions of law or other matters as to which [his] presence does not bear a `"`reasonably substantial relation to the fullness of his opportunity to defend against the charge.'"'" (People v. Bradford, supra, 15 Cal.4th at p. 1357, 65 Cal. Rptr.2d 145, 939 P.2d 259; accord, e.g., People v. Jackson (1980) 28 Cal.3d 264, 308-309, 168 Cal.Rptr. 603, 618 P.2d 149 (plur. opn. of Richardson, J.).)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.