Opinion
June 17, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hanophy, J.).
Ordered that the judgment under Indictment No. 597/87 is reversed, on the law, and a new trial is ordered; the facts have been considered and are determined to have been established; and it is further,
Ordered that the judgments under Indictment Nos. 587/87 and 2412/87 are reversed, the defendant's pleas of guilty to those indictments are vacated, and the matters are remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for further proceedings on the indictments.
The record reveals that, during the trial of Indictment No. 597/87, the prosecution was in possession of written notes concerning a police interview with a prosecution witness who subsequently testified at trial. However, the existence of these notes was not disclosed until after trial. Inasmuch as the notes constituted Rosario material, the prosecution's failure to turn them over during trial constituted per se reversible error (see, People v Martinez, 71 N.Y.2d 937; People v Ranghelle, 69 N.Y.2d 56). Accordingly, we reverse and remit the matter for a new trial.
Moreover, we find that defendant's pleas of guilty on Indictment No. 587/87 and Indictment No. 2412/87, having been induced by the understanding that the sentences would be concurrent with the sentence imposed for his conviction under Indictment No. 597/87, now set aside, must be vacated (see, People v Fuggazzatto, 62 N.Y.2d 862, 863; People v Clark, 45 N.Y.2d 432, 440).
We have considered the defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, and find them to be without merit. Bracken, J.P., Kunzeman, Sullivan and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.