Opinion
July 24, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rienzi, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the trial court erred when it closed the courtroom during the testimony of two undercover police officers is without merit. As to one of the officers, defense counsel expressly stated that he had no objection to the closure of the courtroom, and thus failed to preserve the issue for appellate review with respect to that officer (see, People v Gonzalez, 135 A.D.2d 829). As to the second officer, the court conducted a hearing during which it was shown that the undercover officer was still engaged in several pending investigations in Brooklyn at the time of the trial and that closure was necessary to protect his safety and the integrity of his ongoing operations (see, People v Jones, 47 N.Y.2d 409, cert denied 444 U.S. 946; People v Hinton, 31 N.Y.2d 71, cert denied 410 U.S. 911; People v Gonzalez, supra). On this record, we find that the court properly granted the People's request for closure.
We have examined the defendant's contention that the sentence imposed was excessive and find it to be without merit. Mangano, J.P., Eiber, Sullivan and Balletta, JJ., concur.