California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Espinoza, 1 Cal.5th 61, 203 Cal.Rptr.3d 647, 373 P.3d 456 (Cal. 2016):
Of course, our conclusion that defendant's voluntary absence operated to waive his constitutional right to be present at trial and permitted continuation of the trial, does not end our inquiry regarding the propriety of the trial court's decision to proceed with the trial in the absence of defendant and defense counsel. Section 1043(b)(2) states that a defendant's voluntary absence shall not prevent the trial from continuing, but it does not require it. Accordingly, the decision whether to continue with a trial in absentia under the statute or to declare a mistrial rests within the discretion of the trial court. (Cf. Cureton v. United States, supra, 396 F.2d at p. 675 [similar language in
[1 Cal.5th 76]
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexsei.com.