Opinion
May 23, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Fisher, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's suppression motion was properly denied as the record supports the hearing court's determination that there was probable cause for his arrest. Indeed, on this record, we conclude that a reasonable person, possessing the same expertise as the arresting officer, would have concluded that an offense had been committed and that the defendant was the perpetrator (see, People v. Hernandez, 198 A.D.2d 299; People v. Fernandez, 185 A.D.2d 944).
In addition, the trial court properly sealed the courtroom during the testimony of an undercover officer. Prior to the closing of the courtroom, the court conducted an inquiry wherein it was established that the purchase of narcotics occurred at 150th Street and Beaver Road, Queens, the undercover officer had worked in that neighborhood during the two weeks immediately prior to the defendant's trial, and he would be returning to that neighborhood in his undercover capacity. Further, the undercover officer testified that if his identity was to become known, his safety would be in jeopardy. Under the circumstances, the trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in closing the courtroom during the undercover police officer's testimony (see, People v. Kin Kan, 78 N.Y.2d 54).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Sullivan, J.P., Rosenblatt, Pizzuto and Altman, JJ., concur.