Opinion
December 2, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Giaccio, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and a new trial is ordered. No questions of fact have been raised or considered.
The defendant was charged with criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree in connection with his alleged sale of two vials of cocaine to an undercover police officer in St. Albans, Queens. At trial, before the undercover officer was called to the stand, the prosecutor requested that the courtroom be closed to the public in view of the officer's "active" status. The trial court granted the motion over the defendant's objection, and excluded the general public as well as members of the defendant's family from the courtroom.
On appeal, the defendant contends that the trial court's "pro forma" closure of the courtroom during the undercover officer's testimony constituted reversible error. We agree. It is settled law that "no closing can be tolerated that is not preceded by an inquiry careful enough to assure * * * that the defendant's right to a public trial is not being sacrificed for less than compelling reasons" (People v Jones, 47 N.Y.2d 409, 414-415, cert denied 444 U.S. 946; see also, People v Clemons, 78 N.Y.2d 48, 53). At bar, however, the record reveals that the Trial Judge summarily closed the courtroom without conducting any inquiry to ascertain whether closure was indeed necessary to protect the undercover officer's safety. Under these circumstances, we conclude that the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a public trial was violated (see, People v Clemons, supra; People v Kin Kan, 78 N.Y.2d 54; People v Romain, 137 A.D.2d 848; People v Cousart, 74 A.D.2d 877).
In view of the foregoing, we need not reach the defendant's remaining contentions. Bracken, J.P., Harwood, Eiber and O'Brien, JJ., concur.