People v. Russell — 191 A.D.2d 1001

Majority

p. 1001

The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Reginald Russell, Appellant.

[595 NYS2d 709]

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We reject the contention that defendant’s absence during a pre-trial Sandoval hearing (see, People v Sandoval, 34 NY2d 371 ) warrants reversal (see, People v Dokes, 79 NY2d 656 ). Because we conclude that subsequent proceedings held on the record in defendant’s presence constituted a de novo Sandoval hearing, reversal is not required (see, People v Smith, 186 AD2d 976 ; see also, People v Berger, 188 AD2d 1073 ; cf., People v Dean, 188 AD2d 1082 ; People v Eady, 185 AD2d 678 , lv denied 80 NY2d 929 ).

The rule enunciated in People v Antommarchi ( 80 NY2d 247 , rearg denied 81 NY2d 759 ) is to be applied prospectively and is, therefore, not applicable to the case at bar (see, People v Mitchell, 80 NY2d 519 ). The sentence imposed was neither harsh nor excessive. (Appeal from Judgment of Monroe County Court, Egan, J. — Manslaughter, 1st Degree.) Present— Pine, J. P., Fallon, Boomer, Davis and Boehm, JJ.

Cases cited

People v. Sandoval 34 NY2d 371 N.Y. 1974-06-19 p. 1001
People v. Dokes 79 NY2d 656 N.Y. 1992-06-11 p. 1001
People v. Smith 186 AD2d 976 N.Y. App. Div. 1992-10-07 p. 1001
People v. Eady 185 AD2d 678 N.Y. App. Div. 1992-07-14 p. 1001
People v. Antommarchi 80 NY2d 247 N.Y. 1992-10-27 p. 1001
People v. Mitchell 80 NY2d 519 N.Y. 1992-12-17 p. 1001