The undercover officer's testimony provided adequate grounds for the trial court to close the courtroom. We have previously held that where the undercover himself testifies that he is still active in the community and is fearful for his safety, the People have made a showing sufficient to warrant closure (People v Santos, 154 A.D.2d 284, lv denied 75 N.Y.2d 817), in compliance with Waller v. Georgia ( 467 U.S. 39), particularly since defendant never suggested any other remedy, but objected only on the ground that an insufficient showing had been made (see also, People v Vidal, 172 A.D.2d 228, lv denied 78 N.Y.2d 927).
Similarly, defendant's claim that he received ineffective assistance of counsel cannot be reviewed on the record before this Court, but is more properly the subject of a CPL 440.10 motion.
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Carro, Rosenberger and Rubin, JJ.