DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant claims that the court deprived him of the right to be present during a replay of his videotaped statement which had been requested by the jury during its deliberation. However, the defendant failed to satisfy his burden of coming forward with substantial evidence to rebut the presumption of regularity which attaches to all criminal proceedings (see People v. Andrew, 299 A.D.2d 415; People v. Williams, 220 A.D.2d 788; People v. Davis, 151 A.D.2d 596).
RITTER, J.P., SANTUCCI, FEUERSTEIN and SCHMIDT, JJ., concur.