From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Thomas

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 5, 2006
25 A.D.3d 346 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Opinion

7491.

January 5, 2006.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (John A.K. Bradley, J.), rendered June 30, 2004, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds and resisting arrest, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to an aggregate term of 4½ to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Gayle Pollack of counsel), for appellant.

Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Rachel S. Bromberg of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Buckley, P.J., Friedman, Marlow, Sullivan and Malone, JJ., concur.


The People made a sufficiently particularized showing of an overriding interest justifying closure of the courtroom during the undercover officer's testimony ( see e.g. People v. Lopez, 18 AD3d 233, lv denied 5 NY3d 807). The officer testified that although he was on restricted duty due to an injury, he planned, upon his recovery, to resume undercover work in the specific area of defendant's arrest. He also testified that unapprehended subjects remained at large and that he feared for his safety. Furthermore, the court properly permitted the officer to testify anonymously based on this same showing ( see People v. Waver, 3 NY3d 748).


Summaries of

People v. Thomas

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 5, 2006
25 A.D.3d 346 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
Case details for

People v. Thomas

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ANTHONY THOMAS…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jan 5, 2006

Citations

25 A.D.3d 346 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 84
808 N.Y.S.2d 644

Citing Cases

People v. Purdie

The defendant claims that his Sixth Amendment right to confrontation was violated when the Supreme Court…