Opinion
October 12, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Carruthers, J.).
Closure of the courtroom during the undercover officer's testimony, except to members of defendant's family, the press, and the Bar, was properly based on a showing that the officer was still actively engaged in undercover work in the Brooklyn area of defendant's arrest, which was easily accessible from the Manhattan courthouse where the officer was to testify, and that the officer had reasonable fears for her safety were her identity to become known ( see, People v. Martinez, 82 N.Y.2d 436, 443; People v. Miller, 190 A.D.2d 609, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 974).
We find the sentence excessive to the extent indicated.
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Rubin, Kupferman and Williams, JJ.