P.

DISCUSSION

Swain's appellate brief raises a single issue. Swain argues that he had a

constitutional and statutory right to be physically present at the September 16, 2011

hearing. He contends that because he was not present at the hearing, the trial court's

order should be reversed and this matter should be remanded for the trial court to hold a

new hearing with Swain in attendance.

Well-established principles apply to a defendant's right to be physically present

during proceedings in a criminal case. "It is established that a defendant has a federal

constitutional right, emanating from the confrontation clause of the Sixth Amendment

and the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, to be present at any stage of

3 the criminal proceedings 'that is critical to its outcome if his presence would contribute to

the fairness of the procedure.' [Citations.] In addition, a defendant has the right to be

personally present at critical proceedings, pursuant to the state Constitution [citations], as

well as pursuant to statute ([Pen. Code,] §§ 977, 1043)." (People v. Bradford (1997)

Cal.4th 1229, 1356-1357 (Bradford).)

Under the applicable…