Majority
—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ferdinand, J.), rendered May 7, 1996, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant claims that the court erred in directing that the courtroom be closed during the testimony of the undercover officer. The testimony at the Hinton hearing (see, People v Hinton, 31 NY2d 71 , 76, cert denied 410 US 911 ) established that
The defendant’s Rosario claim is unpreserved for appellate review, and, in any event, is without merit. The court properly conducted an in camera examination of writings made by the prosecutor during her interview with a police witness (see, People v Barrigar, 233 AD2d 845 ), and found them to be as the prosecutor represented, that is, either not relevant to the witness, or material that was attorney work product (see, People v Shaw, 212 AD2d 745 ; People v Roberts, 178 AD2d 622 ; cf., People v Austin, 75 NY2d 723 , 730; People v Gourgue, 239 AD2d 357 ). O’Brien, J. P., Sullivan, Pizzuto and Joy, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- People v. Hinton 31 NY2d 71 at 76 p. 519
- People v. Ramos 90 NY2d 490 at 500 p. 520
- People v. Martinez 82 NY2d 436 at 443 p. 520
- People v. Pagan 245 AD2d 312 p. 520
- People v. Green 244 AD2d 571 p. 520
- People v. Pryor 243 AD2d 656 p. 520
- People v. Diaz 237 AD2d 457 p. 520
- People v. Roberts 178 AD2d 622 p. 520
- People v. Adger 75 NY2d 723 at 730 p. 520
- People v. Gourgue 239 AD2d 357 p. 520