Judgment unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum:
We reject the contention of defendant that the suppression court erred in denying his motion to suppress his statements to the police. "In reviewing a determination of the suppression court, great weight must be accorded its decision because of its ability to observe and assess the credibility of the witnesses, and its findings should not be disturbed unless clearly erroneous" ( People v Stokes, 212 A.D.2d 986, 987, lv denied 86 N.Y.2d 741). Defendant's contention that the evidence is legally insufficient to support the conviction of depraved indifference murder is unpreserved for our review ( see, People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10, 19). In any event, that contention lacks merit ( see, People v. Best, 202 A.D.2d 1015, 1015-1016, affd 85 N.Y.2d 826). We have examined the remaining contention of defendant and those raised in his pro se supplemental brief and conclude they are lacking in merit.