Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

PEOPLE v. WALKER

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department.
Dec 23, 1994
Important Paras
Please sign up to view Important Paras.

Judgment unanimously reversed on the law and new trial granted. Memorandum: Defendant was not present for a Sandoval conference held in chambers. Because the record establishes that defendant's presence at the Sandoval conference would not have been superfluous, his conviction for criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third and fourth degrees must be reversed (see, People v Favor, 82 N.Y.2d 254, rearg denied 83 N.Y.2d 801; People v Dokes, 79 N.Y.2d 656; People v Eady, 185 A.D.2d 678, lv denied 80 N.Y.2d 929).

Defendant entered a plea of guilty to criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree with the understanding that the sentence would be concurrent with the sentence imposed upon his conviction for criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third and fourth degrees, which is reversed. Consequently, reversal of that conviction is also required (see, People v Fuggazzatto, 62 N.Y.2d 862; People v Rice, 199 A.D.2d 1054, 1055).