Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We reject the contention of defendant that County Court erred in denying his motion to suppress on the ground that he was questioned by the police before he received his Miranda warnings. The record establishes that defendant was not under arrest at the time of the questioning and that the police advised defendant that he was free to leave. Defendant's freedom of movement was not restricted, the atmosphere was not coercive and the length of the questioning was less than half an hour. Under those circumstances, defendant was not in custody and Miranda warnings were not required ( see, People v. Yukl, 25 N.Y.2d 585, 588-589, rearg denied 26 N.Y.2d 883, cert denied 400 U.S. 851; People v. McGowan, 201 A.D.2d 743, lv denied 83 N.Y.2d 1005).
We further conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's initial motion for new counsel. Defendant failed to show "`good cause' for the desired substitution" ( People v. Sawyer, 57 N.Y.2d 12, 18, rearg dismissed 57 N.Y.2d 776, cert denied 459 U.S. 1178). Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that the court erred in neither considering nor granting him youthful offender status ( see, People v. Granton, 236 A.D.2d 624, 625, lv denied 89 N.Y.2d 1012). In any event, the court did not abuse its discretion in failing to adjudicate defendant a youthful offender ( see, CPL 720.10). Finally, defendant's sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe.