Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
We agree with the defendant's contention that the statements he made to law enforcement officials should have been suppressed because they were obtained in violation of his right to counsel. However, a reversal of his conviction is not warranted because the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt (see generally, Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 US ___, 111 S Ct 1246; see also, People v. Santiago, 174 A.D.2d 764; People v. Selby, 171 A.D.2d 821).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05) or without merit. Thompson, J.P., Kunzeman, Eiber and Miller, JJ., concur.