Judgment affirmed.

The alleged inadequacy of the People's notice pursuant to CPL 710.30 did not require exclusion of the defendant's statements under the circumstances at bar. The defendant received notice of the sum and substance of the statement and had a full opportunity to challenge the admissibility of the statement at the Huntley hearing, after which that branch of his motion which was to suppress his statements was denied (see, People v. Swanton, 107 A.D.2d 829; People v. Whitaker, 106 A.D.2d 594; People v. Bennett, 80 A.D.2d 68, affd 56 N.Y.2d 837).

With respect to the issue of deception in obtaining the defendant's confession, we conclude that the conduct of the police officer was not so egregious as to render the confession involuntary (see, People v. Tarsia, 50 N.Y.2d 1; People v. Boone, 22 N.Y.2d 476, cert denied sub nom. Brandon v. New York, 393 U.S. 991; People v. McQueen, 18 N.Y.2d 337). Mangano, J.P., Gibbons, Niehoff and Spatt, JJ., concur.