| People v Echevarria |
| 2011 NY Slip Op 08217 [89 AD3d 545] |
| November 15, 2011 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v AlexEchevarria, Appellant. |
—[*1] Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (David E.A. Crowley of counsel), forrespondent.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Daniel P. FitzGerald, J.), rendered April 9,2010, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in thethird degree and criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds, and sentencinghim, as a second felony drug offender whose prior felony conviction was a violent felony, toconcurrent terms of 10 years, unanimously affirmed.
By limiting courtroom closure solely to the duration of the trial testimony of two undercoverpolice officers, and by noting that it would separately consider opening the proceeding todefendant's family members if any requested access to the courtroom during the period ofclosure, the trial court discharged its duty to consider reasonable alternatives to closing theproceeding (see Presley v Georgia, 558 US —, —, 130 S Ct 721, 724[2010]; People v Mickens, 82 AD3d430 [2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 798 [2011]; People v Manning, 78 AD3d 585, 586 [2010], lv denied 16NY3d 861 [2011], cert denied 565 US —, 132 S Ct 268 [2011]).
The court's charge on the agency defense adequately conveyed the appropriate principles(see People v Job, 87 NY2d 956 [1996]; People v Pratt, 39 AD3d 315 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 849[2007]). The court was not obligated to include all the language contained in the Criminal JuryInstructions (see People v Ladson,41 AD3d 248, 249 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 877 [2007]), and nothing in the chargeas given can be viewed as directing a verdict. In any event, defendant's own testimony negatedhis agency defense in that he admitted that his desire to [*2]obtaindrugs as compensation for arranging the transaction was not incidental, but was his solemotivation (see People v Sanchez,35 AD3d 161 [2006], lv denied 8 NY3d 949 [2007]).
We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur—Andrias, J.P., Friedman,DeGrasse, Freedman and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.