In a prosecution for bank robbery, testimony of a witness which did not connect the accused with the crime and merely served to qualify the witness was received during the unnoticed and involuntary absence of the accused. No objection was made by the counsel for the accused who was present at the time. When the accused's absence was discovered, the motion of counsel that the cause be withdrawn from the jury was overruled and the court admonished the jury not to consider the testimony. Appellant contended that he had been denied a right and that therefore injury must be presumed. Held, that since the irregularity did not result in injury it would not render the verdict invalid. Ray v. State, (Ind. 1934) 192 N. E. 751.
CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE - RIGHT OF ACCUSED TO BE PRESENT AT TRIAL,
Mich. L. Rev.
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol33/iss7/14