Opinion
May 4, 1987
Appeal from the County Court, Nassau County (Ain, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The trial court's refusal to suppress physical evidence and a statement was proper. The record reflects that the defendant's arrest was supported by probable cause (CPL 140.10 [a]; People v. De Bour, 40 N.Y.2d 210; People v. Christian, 118 A.D.2d 793) and that the subsequent search of the defendant was incident to a lawful arrest (see, Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752, reh denied 396 U.S. 869; People v. Weintraub, 35 N.Y.2d 351). Further, the statement which the defendant sought to suppress, which was made after he was advised of his Miranda rights and after he indicated that he did not wish to make a statement, was blurted out while the defendant was being searched at the precinct. Upon this record we conclude that the statement sought to be suppressed was spontaneous and voluntary and was not the product of any police conduct designed to evoke a declaration (see, People v. Lynes, 49 N.Y.2d 286). Mollen, P.J., Mangano, Brown and Lawrence, JJ., concur.