The hearing court properly denied defendant's suppression motion in all respects. The arresting officer's observation, in an area known for weapon and drug related arrests, of defendant hastily shoving an object into his waistband at the mere sight of an approaching police car, combined with his hasty retreat into a nearby building accomplished by running in front of the moving police car and pushing aside a woman and child, provided an objective, credible reason for the police to follow defendant into the building for purposes of inquiry (People v. Hollman, 79 N.Y.2d 181, 185). When the officer, lawfully inside the building in question, observed defendant throw down a handgun, probable cause existed for his arrest (People v. De Bour, 40 N.Y.2d 210). Defendant's action in throwing down the gun was not precipitated by any illegal police conduct, and thus constituted a calculated, voluntary abandonment (People v. Boodle, 47 N.Y.2d 398, 404, cert denied 444 U.S. 969). Defendant's statement, made during the arresting officer's taking of pedigree information following a lawful arrest, was a spontaneous utterance and not the result of any police questioning, express or implied, intended to elicit an incriminating response (People v. Smith, 151 A.D.2d 792, 792-793, lv denied 74 N.Y.2d 900).
Concur — Carro, J.P., Wallach, Asch, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.