Opinion
December 20, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Feinberg, J.).
Ordered the the judgment is affirmed.
The hearing court properly determined that both the gun recovered from the defendant and the statement he made while in custody were admissible at trial. The record reveals that the police officer was justified in believing that the defendant was armed and thus the subsequent frisk of the defendant for weapons was permissible (see, People v Rodriguez, 177 A.D.2d 521, 522). The statement which the defendant made, after he had invoked his right to remain silent, was completely spontaneous and thus admissible (see, People v Huffman, 61 N.Y.2d 795, 797). Given the defendant's status as a persistent violent felony offender, we cannot say that his sentence is excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Mangano, P.J., Balletta, Lawrence and O'Brien, JJ., concur.