IN THE FIFTIETH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, PARISH OF PEINE DE MORT
STATE OF LOUISIANA
No. _____

=================================

STATE OF LOUISIANA, Plaintiff
v.
JOHN CLIENT, Defendant

=================================

ASSERTION OF RIGHT TO BE PRESENT

COMES NOW, JOHN CLIENT, by counsel, and asserts his right to be present at all proceedings in this case, pursuant to the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and Article 1, Sections 2, 3, 5, 13, 14, 16, 17, 19, 20, 22, and 24 of the Louisiana Constitution. In support of his assertion, Mr. CLIENT states as follows:
1. This is a capital case. Mr. CLIENT faces the death penalty.
2. Defendant has an absolute, non-waivable right to be present at every hearing at which the prosecution takes another step towards executing him. Over a century ago, the Supreme Court acknowledged that "[t]he necessities of the defense may not be met by the presence of his counsel only." Hopt v. People, 110 U.S. 574, 578 4 S. Ct. 202, 282 L. Ed. 262 (1884). Already, by 1912, the Court had held that the defendant "is entitled to be present at all . . . stages of the proceedings." Diaz v. United States, 223 U.S. 442, 454, 32 S. Ct. 250, 56 L. Ed. 500 (1912) (emphasis supplied); see also Snyder v. Massachusetts, 291 U.S. 97, 105-106 (1933) ("in a prosecution for a felony the defendant has the privilege under the Fourteenth Amendment to be present in his own person" (emphasis supplied)); Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 819-20,95 S. Ct. 2525, 45 L. Ed. 2d 562, (1975) ("[t]he right to defend is given directly to the accused; for it is he who suffers the consequences if the defense fails"). The Snyder Court provided the basic rationale which underlies the accused's right to be present: only then "will [it] be in his power . . . to give advice or suggestions. . . ." Id., 291 U.S. at 106.
3. Under the authority of "Diaz and Hopt . . . a capital defendant's right to presence is nonwaivable." Proffitt v. Wainwright, 685 F.2d 1227, 1258 (11th Cir. 1982), modified on rehearing, 706 F.2d 311 (11th Cir. 1983); accord Hall v. Wainwright, 733 F.2d 766, 775 (11th Cir. 1984).
4. Mr. CLIENT's assertion of the right to be present extends to all aspects of this case, including but not limited to:
a. all pre-trial hearings, conferences or any other matters (save only telephone scheduling of proposed hearings or meetings between the attorneys);
b. all other pre-trial matters, including but not limited to the drawing of the jury pool;
c. all aspects of the trial, including but not limited to all voir dire, all bench conferences, and all charge conferences;
d. all other hearings and judicial proceedings of any kind which may influence whether he lives or dies.
WHEREFORE Mr. CLIENT moves that his motion be granted.
??

(..continued)