People v. Caldara

• Decision Date: 27 March 2019
• Docket Number: 2014–09699,Ind.No. 10533/13
• Citation: 170 A.D.3d 1191,94 N.Y.S.3d 868 (Mem)
• Parties: The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Charles CALDARA, Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

170 A.D.3d 1191

94 N.Y.S.3d 868 (Mem)

The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent,

v.Charles CALDARA, Appellant.

2014–09699

Ind.No. 10533/13

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Argued—November 15, 2018

March 27, 2019

Paul Skip Laisure, New York, N.Y. (Patricia Pazner of counsel), for appellant.

Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Johnnette Traill, and Danielle M. O'Boyle of counsel), for respondent.

REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, SYLVIA O. HINDS–RADIX, JOSEPH J. MALTESE, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

After conducting a Hinton hearing (see People v. Hinton , 31 N.Y.2d 71, 334 N.Y.S.2d 885, 286 N.E.2d 265 ), at which the testimony of the undercover police officer who purchased narcotics from the defendant provided a link between the officer's safety concerns and his open court testimony, the trial court properly considered reasonable alternatives, and made findings which adequately supported the determination to close the courtroom for the undercover officer's trial testimony (see People v. Echevarria , 21 N.Y.3d 1, 11, 966 N.Y.S.2d 747, 989 N.E.2d 9 ; People v. Jones , 96 N.Y.2d 213, 220, 726 N.Y.S.2d 608, 750 N.E.2d 524 ; People v. Ramos , 90 N.Y.2d 490, 498, 662 N.Y.S.2d 739, 685 N.E.2d 492 ; People v. Lewis , 148 A.D.3d 1056, 51 N.Y.S.3d 526 ; People v. James , 47 A.D.3d 947, 948, 849 N.Y.S.2d 670 ).

We agree with the trial court's denial of the defendant's request for an agency charge, since no reasonable view of the evidence supported a finding that, in the narcotics transactions at issue, the defendant was acting solely on behalf of the undercover officer (see People v. Herring , 83 N.Y.2d 780, 782, 610 N.Y.S.2d 949, 632 N.E.2d 1272 ; People v. Roche , 45 N.Y.2d 78, 82–83, 407 N.Y.S.2d 682, 379 N.E.2d 208 ; People v. Fraser , 134 A.D.3d 734, 735, 22 N.Y.S.3d 70 ; People v. Shodunke , 12 A.D.3d 466, 783 N.Y.S.2d 822 ).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte , 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675 ).

RIVERA, J.P., CHAMBERS, HINDS–RADIX and MALTESE, JJ., concur.