Mercure, J.
We reject defendant's contention that Supreme Court (Keegan, J.), improperly denied suppression of testimony regarding defendant's showup identification. The evidence adduced at the suppression hearing showed that defendant was stopped by the police one quarter of a mile from the crime scene and returned for a showup within 10 minutes of the commission of the crime, sufficient geographic and temporal proximity to the crime to establish reliability (see, People v Duuvon, 77 N.Y.2d 541, 543). The fact that defendant was handcuffed did not render the identification impermissibly suggestive (see, People v White, 185 A.D.2d 472, 473, lv denied 80 N.Y.2d 935) and did little to add to the inference that defendant was considered a suspect (see, People v Thomas, 105 A.D.2d 1098). Moreover, Supreme Court correctly determined that the People had established an independent basis for an in-court identification given the complainant's familiarity with defendant as a regular customer and his opportunity to view defendant during the commission of the crime (see, People v Ramos, 42 N.Y.2d 834).
We have considered defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.
Mikoll, J.P., Crew III, White and Yesawich Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.