PAST ARTICLES AND EDITORIAL BOARDS
CLOSING THE COURTROOM FOR UNDERCOVER POLICE WITNESSES:
NEW YORK MUST ADOPT A CONSISTENT STANDARD
Robin Zeidel
4 J.L. & Pol'y 659 (1996)
The doors to the courtroom are often closed when the witnesses need to remain anonymous. Such is the case for undercover police officers, whose identities, if compromised, could be dangerous for the undercover police officer, his or her family and fellow officers in related operations. New York is particularly concerned about these issues and therefore during the testimony of undercover police officers the courtroom doors are frequently closed. What is at stake with this practice, however, is the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a public trial.

Since People v. Hinton, New York has protected undercover officers' identities by closing the courtroom. The Supreme Court, in Waller v. Georgia, set forth a stringent four-part test to determine when closing the courtroom doors is permissible. According to the author, despite the New York Court of Appeals rigorous application of the test, the test is applied inconsistently among New York's lower courts. The author states that the standards applied by the lower courts include standards that have been overruled and some that ignore the Supreme Court's rulings on the issue.

The author stresses that adherence to the Waller test is necessary to preserve the defendant's right to a fair public trial. The dangers facing the undercover officer, according to the author, must be determined and weighed against the rights of the defendant through the use of the Waller test. Only after a careful evaluation of the countervailing interests, the Note stresses, may the court consider whether the danger faced by the officer merits an exception to the defendant's right to a public trial.