We disagree. The police entry into the house, including the bathroom, was fully consensual ( see, People v Gonzalez, 237 A.D.2d 375; People v. Travis OO., 237 A.D.2d 646; People v. Brown, 234 A.D.2d 211, lv granted 89 N.Y.2d 1017; compare, People v Gonzalez, 88 N.Y.2d 289) and there is nothing to suggest that defendant was under arrest or in police custody at the time of the showup identification ( see, People v. Evans, 237 A.D.2d 458, lv denied 89 N.Y.2d 1092; People v. Smith, 236 A.D.2d 639; People v Smith, 234 A.D.2d 946, lv denied 89 N.Y.2d 1041). In addition, given that the showup identification occurred shortly after the commission of the crime, in close proximity to the location of the crime and was made spontaneously by a neighbor who witnessed defendant flee from the scene of the crime and also by the victim himself, we do not find that it was unduly suggestive ( see, People v. Duuvon, 77 N.Y.2d 541; People v. Santiago, 236 A.D.2d 229, lv denied 89 N.Y.2d 1040).