In what scenario might a trial proceed without the presence of the accused?

A trial may proceed without the presence of the accused in the scenario where the accused does not appear despite being properly notified of the trial. This is based on the principle that individuals have a right to be present at their own trial; however, this right can be waived if they fail to attend after having received adequate notice.

In such cases, the court may consider the absence as a forfeiture of the right to be present. This ensures that the judicial process can continue and not be unduly delayed by the defendant's absence, provided the court has followed the appropriate procedures for notifying the accused. It is important to ensure that the notice is clear and sufficient, as the right to due process must still be respected even when a trial proceeds in absence of the accused.

Scenarios such as the accused being out of state or not having been notified do not justify proceeding without their presence. If the accused has not been notified, the trial cannot legally proceed, as due process is compromised. Similarly, if a trial is delayed, it is typically to accommodate the presence of the accused rather than to continue without them.