Ordered that the judgment and the amended judgment are affirmed.
The defendant's claims that the Grand Jury proceedings were defective, and that the evidence presented to the Grand Jury resulting in his indictment was legally insufficient, are not reviewable on his appeal from the ensuing judgment of conviction (see, CPL 210.30; People v. Jones, 204 A.D.2d 659; People v Cunningham, 163 A.D.2d 412; see also, People v. Bey, 179 A.D.2d 905, 906; cf., People v. Pelchat, 62 N.Y.2d 97; People v Alexander, 136 A.D.2d 332, 334-335).
We conclude that the evidence adduced at the Huntley hearing supports the suppression court's determination that, under the circumstances surrounding the interview in the defendant's hospital room, the defendant's statements to police officials were voluntarily made (see, People v. Anderson, 42 N.Y.2d 35, 38; People v. Eastman, 114 A.D.2d 509; People v. Pearson, 106 A.D.2d 588).
The defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, are unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit. Bracken, J.P., Miller, Ritter and Goldstein, JJ., concur.