Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contentions, we find that the hearing court properly denied his motion to suppress inculpatory statements made by him to the police because the statements were spontaneous and not in response to any custodial interrogation (see, People v. Harris, 142 A.D.2d 596; People v Pileggi, 141 A.D.2d 866; People v. Ondrizek, 141 A.D.2d 770; People v. Suarez, 140 A.D.2d 558). Nor were the statements rendered involuntary by virtue of the fact that the defendant may have been intoxicated at the time they were made (see, People v Grune, 139 A.D.2d 763; see also, People v. Schompert, 19 N.Y.2d 300, cert denied 389 U.S. 874).
We have examined the defendant's challenge to the propriety of the sentence and find it to be without merit. Brown, J.P., Kooper, Eiber and O'Brien, JJ., concur.