Opinion
March 2, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rios, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his contention that there was no probable cause to support his arrest in the hallway of an apartment building since he did not raise this contention at the hearing or during the trial (see, People v. Adams, 57 N.Y.2d 1035, 1037), and we decline to reach it in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the showup, which was conducted in close temporal and spatial proximity to the commission of the shooting (see, People v. Duuvon, 77 N.Y.2d 541, 543; People v. Attebery, 223 A.D.2d 714, 716), was not rendered suggestive under the facts of this case merely because the defendant was handcuffed and in the presence of police officers (see, People v. Davis, 232 A.D.2d 154, 155; People v. Aponte, 222 A.D.2d 304, 305; People v. Padilla, 219 A.D.2d 688, 689; People v. Carney, 212 A.D.2d 721, 722; People v. Bitz, 209 A.D.2d 709, 710).
Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Ritter and Copertino, JJ., concur.