Judgment unanimously reversed on the law and facts and new trial granted. Memorandum: Following a reconstruction hearing (see, People v Mitchell, 189 A.D.2d 337), County Court found that Sandoval proceedings had been held in chambers outside of defendant's presence. Consequently, reversal of defendant's conviction is required (see, People v Dokes, 79 N.Y.2d 656), unless the record reveals that the court's Sandoval ruling was wholly favorable to defendant (see, People v Odiat, 82 N.Y.2d 872, 874; People v Favor, 82 N.Y.2d 254, 268, reargument denied 83 N.Y.2d 801).
We credit the testimony of defendant's trial attorney at the reconstruction hearing that the court's Sandoval ruling permitted the prosecutor to cross-examine defendant about a prior drug conviction. Thus, the Sandoval ruling was not wholly favorable to defendant and reversal is required. We note, however, that the better practice is for the Judge who presides at the reconstruction hearing to make a factual finding concerning the content of the Sandoval ruling.