Opinion
March 13, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Brill, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the trial court improperly closed the courtroom during the undercover police officer's testimony is without merit. The testimony at the hearing on the closure clearly established that this officer was then engaged in pending, undercover narcotic operations and that revealing his identity would endanger himself and his ongoing operations (see, People v. Reece, 204 A.D.2d 495; cf., People v. Martinez, 82 N.Y.2d 436).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or do not warrant reversal. Thompson, J.P., Lawrence, Hart and Goldstein, JJ., concur.