Fairey v. Tucker, 567 U.S. 924

Fairey was tried in absentia on state felony charges after failing to appear at his scheduled trial date.
He had not received actual notice of the trial date, but the state court deemed waiver based on pretrial notices and his absence.
Subpoenas and notices were mailed to addresses including California and South Carolina, not to Fairey’s Florida address where he resided at the time.
Fairey participated actively in pretrial proceedings pro se and sought dismissal, traveling interstate to engage with the court.
The trial occurred without Fairey’s presence or defense hearing; he was convicted and sentenced to eight years and restitution.
State appellate and federal courts denied relief, including a COA, before Fairey sought certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial in absentia without notice violated the Sixth Amendment	Fairey argues absence violated right to be present.	State courts held waiver based on notices; trial may proceed without presence.	Court would grant relief; COA should issue and reverse the judgment.
Whether the state waiver based on pretrial notices and prior conduct was valid	Waiver cannot be inferred from inadvertent or incomplete notices.	Waiver supported by notice to California address and bond form warning.	Waiver not established; absence not demonstrative of intent to waive.

Snyder v. Massachusetts, 291 U.S. 97 (1934) (right to presence relates to defense opportunity)
Crosby v. United States, 506 U.S. 255 (1993) (presence prerequisite; two exceptions to presence rule)
Diaz v. United States, 223 U.S. 442 (1912) (waiver requires knowing relinquishment)
Illinois v. Allen, 397 U.S. 337 (1970) (disruptive conduct excusing presence in court)
United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725 (1993) (waiver analysis; deliberate relinquishment of rights)
Carnley v. Cochran, 369 U.S. 506 (1962) (presumption against waiver of fundamental rights)