Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The suppression court properly concluded that the hospital room showup was not improper or unduly suggestive under the circumstances ( see, e.g., People v. Conyers, 176 A.D.2d 340; People v. West, 159 A.D.2d 378; People v. Thompson, 129 A.D.2d 655, 656-657). Showup procedures which are close in time and location to the scene are permissible in the interest of prompt identification ( see, People v. Gonzalez, 210 A.D.2d 168; People v. Drake, 141 A.D.2d 560, 561; People v. Whitney, 149 A.D.2d 748).
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the trial court properly denied the defendant's request for further disclosure of a report prepared by the New York City Police Department's Office of Internal Affairs concerning their investigation of the complainant, as the defendant sought disclosure of the full report simply for the purpose of gaining information to impeach the general credibility of the complainant ( see, People v Gissendanner, 48 N.Y.2d 543, 548).
The defendant was not deprived of the effective assistance of trial counsel ( see, People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147; see also, People v. Ellis, 81 N.Y.2d 854).
Finally, the defendant's claim that his sentence was excessive is without merit ( see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
Miller, J.P., Pizzuto, Altman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.