Ordered that the appeals from the judgments rendered under indictments Nos. 61346 and 62781, are dismissed as abandoned; and it is further,
Ordered that the judgment rendered under indictment No. 59500 is affirmed.
The hearing court's determination that the statements made by the defendant while he was being driven to the police station were spontaneous finds ample support in the record. Thus those statements were properly admitted in evidence despite the fact that the defendant had not received Miranda warnings and that his right to counsel had indelibly attached (see, People v. Krom, 61 N.Y.2d 187, 199; People v. Ortega, 135 A.D.2d 840).
The prosecutor's use, in his opening statements, of a nontestifying codefendant's statement wherein the defendant was inculpated by use of a nickname which the prosecutor then proceeded to attribute to the defendant, was clearly error which may have negatively impacted upon the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confront the witnesses against him (see, Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123). However, given that this impropriety only occurred in the prosecutor's opening statement, which the jury was informed several times was not evidence, and was not repeated during the presentation of the People's evidence, we find that the prosecutor's misconduct does not warrant reversal (see, People v. Brothers, 72 A.D.2d 616; see generally, People v. Roopchand, 107 A.D.2d 35, affd. 65 N.Y.2d 837).
We have considered the defendant's remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Thompson, J.P., Brown, Kunzeman and Miller, JJ., concur.