Defendant's contention that the trial court erred in closing the courtroom during the testimony of an undercover police officer is not preserved for appellate review, since defendant voiced only general objections to the closure and did not cross-examine the detective or otherwise challenge the People's proof that his safety would be endangered by testifying in open court ( see, People v. Pollock, 50 N.Y.2d 547, 550; People v Diaz, 197 A.D.2d 441, lv denied 82 N.Y.2d 893), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Ellerin, Asch, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.