Opinion
Submitted April 6, 2000.
May 22, 2000.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Marrero, J.), rendered December 24, 1998, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Sally Wasserman, New York, N.Y., for appellant.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard
Joblove, Sholom J. Twersky, and Richard J. Davis of counsel), for respondent.
Before: DANIEL W. JOY, J.P., ANITA R. FLORIO, HOWARD MILLER, NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the trial court violated his right to a public trial during the testimony of two undercover police officers was not preserved for appellate review since the defendant consented to the procedure employed by the trial court (see, People v. Melendez, 265 A.D.2d 346; see generally, People v. Ramos, 90 N.Y.2d 490, cert denied sub nom. Ayala v. State of New York, 522 U.S. 1002; People v. Espejo, 237 A.D.2d 458). In any event, the procedure was a reasonable alternative to the closure of the courtroom (see, People v. Ramos, supra; People v. Oliphant, 258 A.D.2d 536). The defendant's assertion that the presence of a court officer stationed outside the courtroom had an intimidating effect upon potential spectators is without merit (see, People v. Jones, 266 A.D.2d 476).
JOY, J.P., FLORIO, H. MILLER and SMITH, JJ., concur.