PEOPLE v. FRANK

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant has failed to satisfy her burden of coming forward with substantial evidence to rebut the presumption of regularity that attaches to all criminal proceedings (see People v. Robinson, 191 A.D.2d 523) with respect to her claim that she was deprived of her right to be present at the Sandoval/Ventimiglia hearing (see People v. Ventimiglia, 52 N.Y.2d 350; People v. Sandoval, 34 N.Y.2d 371; People v. Firrira, 258 A.D.2d 666; People v. Robinson, supra; People v. Pichardo, 168 A.D.2d 577).

PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, KRAUSMAN and McGINITY, JJ., concur.