Opinion
March 2, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Juviler, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The hearing court correctly denied that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress his post-lineup statement. The statement, which was made after the lineup procedure, was spontaneous and not the result of custodial interrogation and was therefore admissible (see, People v. Noto, 188 A.D.2d 490; People v. Mitchell, 166 A.D.2d 676; People v. Williams, 154 A.D.2d 724; see also, People v. Boodle, 47 N.Y.2d 398, cert. denied 444 U.S. 969).
The trial court properly refused to issue an adverse-inference charge with respect to the People's failure to call four witnesses. The People established that the testimony of one of these witness would be immaterial and cumulative and that the other witnesses were unavailable (see, People v. Gonzalez, 68 N.Y.2d 424; People v. Morillo, 219 A.D.2d 541; People v. Mancini, 207 A.D.2d 730; People v. Morris, 168 A.D.2d 464; People v. Rodriguez, 153 A.D.2d 703).
The defendant's remaining contention lacks merit (see, People v. Page, 72 N.Y.2d 69; People v. Oyewole, 220 A.D.2d 624; People v. Miranda, 223 A.D.2d 728; People v. Jamison, 203 A.D.2d 385; CPL 270.15).
Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Miller and Krausman, JJ., concur.