Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the hearing court did not err in denying his motion to suppress the statements made by him to law enforcement officials, as there was no unequivocal assertion of his right to remain silent ( see, People v. Goss, 162 A.D.2d 466, revd on other grounds 78 N.Y.2d 996; People v. Morton, 231 A.D.2d 927).
Any possible prejudice which may have resulted when the jury heard testimony that the defendant was involved in an uncharged crime was alleviated by the court's curative action ( see, People v. Santiago, 52 N.Y.2d 865; People v. Ortega, 224 A.D.2d 552; People v. Richardson, 175 A.D.2d 143). There is no reason to doubt that the clear and immediate curative instruction given by the court was followed by the jury ( see, People v. Smith, 125 A.D.2d 614).
In addition, evidence that the defendant was in an attic crawl space when the police arrived to apprehend him was properly admitted to show consciousness of guilt ( see, People v. Yazum, 13 N.Y.2d 302; People v. DeGina, 140 A.D.2d 537, revd on other grounds 72 N.Y.2d 768).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review, without merit, or do not warrant reversal.
Rosenblatt, J. P., Ritter, Sullivan and Goldstein, JJ., concur.