The People concede that the defendant was in custody when he made a second statement to the arresting officers concerning the knife used to stab the victim and its whereabouts in his apartment. Therefore it was error to deny suppression of that second statement as it was made while the defendant was in custody prior to his being given the Miranda warnings (Miranda v Arizona, 384 U.S. 436). Since the knife was located as a result of that statement it should have been suppressed as well (People v Knapp, 57 N.Y.2d 161, cert denied 462 U.S. 1106). However, reversal is not required under the circumstances of this case where defendant raised a justification defense in which he admitted that he stabbed the victim with the knife in question. Any other error which is perceived by virtue of the admission of the portion of the defendant's statement in which he stated that he washed the knife in question before replacing it in his kitchen, was harmless given the other evidence properly before the jury in this case (People v Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230). We have reviewed the other arguments raised by the defendant and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Ross and Asch, JJ.