Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
There is no merit to the defendant's contention that the showup identification should have been suppressed. Although the defendant was identified while handcuffed and sitting in a marked police car in the presence of a uniformed police officer, the defendant was apprehended at the crime scene and was viewed by the eyewitness within a short time after the commission of the crime. A showup identification under these circumstances is not so unduly suggestive as to create a substantial likelihood of misidentification and thus is permissible (see, People v Duuvon, 77 N.Y.2d 541; People v. Riley, 70 N.Y.2d 523; People v Doherty, 198 A.D.2d 296; People v. Grassia, 195 A.D.2d 607; People v. Rowlett, 193 A.D.2d 768).
We have considered the defendant's remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Thompson, J.P., Lawrence, O'Brien and Krausman, JJ., concur.