People v. Eppinger

Section 115-4.1(a) of Code of Criminal Procedure, which provides that an attorney must be appointed to represent a defendant who is tried in absentia, is inapplicable to in-custody defendants, and thus trial court was not statutorily required to appoint a third public defender and continue the trial date because Defendant, after waiving his right to counsel, decided to waive also his right to be present at trial by refusing to leave his holding cell. Express statutory authority is not a prerequisite to trial in absentia. (KILBRIDE, THOMAS, GARMAN, and KARMEIER, concurring; BURKE and FREEMAN, dissenting.)