Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, and the matter is remitted to the County Court, Nassau County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5).
We find no merit to the defendant's contention that his statement to the investigating detective should have been suppressed. The defendant's answer to a single question, which was not intended to elicit an inculpatory response, did not fall within the bounds of a custodial interrogation requiring Miranda warnings (see, People v Huffman, 41 N.Y.2d 29; People v Rosen, 112 A.D.2d 253, 255; People v Fadale, 92 A.D.2d 723).
We further find that the sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Balletta, J.P., Eiber, Ritter and Santucci, JJ., Concur.