Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in denying defendant’s request for a missing witness charge. Defendant met his initial burden of demonstrating that the uncalled witness, a paid informant who arranged and witnessed the sale of cocaine, was "knowledgeable about a pending material issue and that such witness would be expected to testify favorably to the opposing party” (People v Gonzalez, 68 NY2d 424, 428; see, People v McCune, 210 AD2d 978, lv denied 85 NY2d 864; People v Ronchi, 154 AD2d 891; People v Anderson, 112 AD2d 782; People v Dillard, 96 AD2d 112). The burden then shifted to the People "to account for the witness’ absence or otherwise demonstrate that the charge would not be appropriate” (People v Gonzalez, supra,
Because the evidence of defendant’s guilt is not overwhelming, the error cannot be deemed harmless (see, People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 241-242; People v Ronchi, supra, at 892) and a new trial is required. In view of our determination, we do not address defendant’s remaining contention. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Cosgrove, J. — Criminal Sale Controlled Substance, 3rd Degree.) Present — Green, J. P., Pine, Fallon, Callahan and Boehm, JJ.