When a defendant waives his right to be present at trial by refusing to leave the courtroom, does he have a right to remain in the courtroom?

Here, there was no casual waiver of defendant's right to be present, uncritically accepted by the court. Defendant actually disrupted the end of the guilt phase trial, hurling obscenities at the court and jurors and demanding to be taken from the courtroom. A disruptive defendant waives his right to be present at trial. (Illinois v. Allen (1970) 397 U.S. 337, 90 S.Ct. 1057, 25 L.Ed.2d 353.) After causing the disruption and having more than ample time to "cool off," defendant solemnly expressed his intention to create further disturbances unless permitted to remain outside. He then declined several invitations to return. Under these circumstances, defendant expressly waived his constitutional right to remain in the courtroom by his own actions, taken with full knowledge and appreciation of the consequences. The court was justified in permitting defendant to remain outside,[812 P.2d 190] allowing him to return at any time. Defendant cites no applicable authority, here or elsewhere, requiring a contrary result. His due process rights were not infringed.