U.S. v. Bethea

In prosecution on charge of possession of counterfeit access device, defendant was entitled to new guilty plea and sentencing hearing(s), where Dist. Ct. had conducted combined guilty plea and sentencing hearing via videoconference where defendant was not physically present before Dist. Ct. Under Fed. R. Crim. Pro. 43(a), defendant was required to be physically present during his guilty plea, and Dist. Ct.’s failure to conduct such hearing constituted per se error. Fact that defendant had consented to instant form of proceeding, or that videoconference was set up to accommodate defendant’s medical concerns did not require different result.