Opinion
December 14, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Groh, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that he was deprived of his right to a public trial (see, People v Jones, 47 N.Y.2d 409, cert denied 444 U.S. 946) when the Trial Judge sua sponte closed the courtroom for the testimony of the undercover police officer without having conducted a hearing or inquiry with respect to the necessity of the closure is unpreserved for appellate review. It has long been held that a defendant may waive his right to a public trial when an objection is not taken to a courtroom closure within a reasonable time thereafter (see, People v Baez, 162 A.D.2d 602, 603; People v Scott, 134 A.D.2d 379; see also, People v Miller, 257 N.Y. 54).
The defendant's remaining contention with respect to the admission of evidence concerning uncharged crimes is similarly not preserved for appellate review (CPL 470.05). In any event, any possible error committed by the trial court regarding the admission of this evidence was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt (see, People v Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 242). Thompson, J.P., Balletta, Eiber and Ritter, JJ., concur.