# Harris v. United States

> District of Columbia Court of Appeals · March 15, 1985 · 489 A.2d 464

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9516417

## Case

- **Full name:** Calvin HARRIS, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee
- **Court:** District of Columbia Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** March 15, 1985
- **Citations:** 489 A.2d 464; 1985 D.C. App. LEXIS 336
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Rogers
- **Judges:** Belson, Rogers
- **Cited by:** 21 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9516417

## Opinion text

ROGERS, Associate Judge,
concurring:
The trial court denied the defendant’s request to be present while the jury was read the testimony of the undercover and observing police officers. This evidence constituted the government’s contested evidence and is over seventy pages of the transcript. The defendant was present in the courtroom when the request was denied; he was also on personal recognizance. In denying the request, the court indicated the reading could take place in the courtroom but as other matters were occurring there, “for convenience,” it would be done in the jury room.
This court, sitting en banc, has recently examined a defendant’s right under Super. Ct.Crim.R. 43(a) to be present at all stages of his trial. Boone v. United States, 483 A.2d 1135, 1136-42 (D.C.1984). Accordingly, in light of our broad interpretation of Rule 43(a) in Boone , I join only in that portion of part I B of the opinion which holds that assuming error, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9516417. Public record. Not legal advice.