Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant was charged as an accomplice of Michael Mebert in the robbery and shooting of a motorist along Federal Hill Road in Putnam County (see, People v. Mebert, 194 A.D.2d 809 [decided herewith]). Investigating this matter and following leads that the defendant and the codefendant were in Danbury, Connecticut, New York State Police Officers went to Danbury. There, after interviewing the codefendant, the police approached the defendant and asked if he would speak with them. The defendant was advised of his Miranda rights (see, Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436). Within two hours, the defendant gave inculpatory statements and a felony complaint was then filed against him in New York, all while the defendant was in Connecticut. To the extent that certain additional information may have been elicited from the defendant at a point subsequent to the time when the felony complaint had been filed in New York, the hearing court suppressed the evidence.
The defendant contends that all of his statements should have been suppressed on the ground that there was an excessive delay in the commencement of criminal proceedings against him. The record simply does not bear out this claim. According great weight to the determination of the hearing court (see, People v Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759, 761; People v. Norris, 122 A.D.2d 82, 83), we find no unnecessary delay which would warrant suppression herein (see, People v. Dairsaw, 46 N.Y.2d 739, cert denied 440 U.S. 985).
The defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Sullivan, J.P., Balletta, O'Brien and Santucci, JJ., concur.