Opinion
October 16, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Sherman, J.).
Ordered that the judgment and the amended judgments are affirmed.
The defendant's contention that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because his trial lawyer did not oppose the People's motion to close the courtroom during the testimony of an undercover police officer is without merit. The defendant himself agreed not to oppose closure because he had no one to attend the trial with him. The trial court asked the defendant if he understood the right he was waiving; the defendant said he did. Furthermore, the trial court conducted a brief hearing pursuant to People v. Hinton ( 31 N.Y.2d 71) and the elements necessary to support closure were established at the hearing (see, People v Martinez, 82 N.Y.2d 436). Accordingly, the trial counsel's failure to oppose closure did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel (see, People v. Garcia, 75 N.Y.2d 973).
The defendant's sentence was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
The defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Mangano, P.J., Balletta, Pizzuto and Santucci, JJ., concur.