People v. Hietschold

Summary

The court held that the trial court substantially complied with the statutory admonishment requirement for a trial in absentia even though it did not expressly warn that defendant's absence would waive his right to confront witnesses. The essential warning was that defendant had a right to be present and that trial could proceed without him if he failed to appear; the confrontation consequence was treated as a corollary. The court also held that the absence of a formal arraignment did not prejudice defendant because the proceedings established that he was proceeding on a not-guilty plea. No separate opinions were filed.