Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
In reviewing a suppression issue, great weight must be accorded to the determination of the hearing court, with its particular advantages of having seen and heard the witnesses. Its determination should not be disturbed unless it is clearly unsupported by the record ( see, People v. Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759, 761). The hearing court properly denied that branch of the defendant's motion which was to suppress certain statements. The defendant was not in custody at the time that she admitted to the shooting ( see, People v. Centano, 76 N.Y.2d 837, 838; People v. Macklin, 202 A.D.2d 445, 446; People v. Walls, 199 A.D.2d 292, 293; People v. Nolcox, 190 A.D.2d 824), and in any event, under the totality of the circumstances, her statements were voluntarily made ( see, People v. Anderson, 42 N.Y.2d 35, 38; People v. Fischl, 182 A.D.2d 699; People v. Pacheco, 168 A.D.2d 465; People v. Jenkins, 167 A.D.2d 421).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
Bracken, J. P., Copertino, Goldstein and McGinity, JJ., concur.