Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: While in custody, defendant was given the Miranda warnings. When asked if he was willing to answer questions, defendant did not respond. He continued to remain silent as the investigating officer asked further questions. Several minutes later and in response to questioning, defendant denied that he set fire to his mother's trailer or that he called his brother, and he then asked to speak with an attorney.
The court erred in refusing to suppress the statements made by defendant in response to questioning (see, People v Ferro, 63 N.Y.2d 316, 322, cert denied 472 U.S. 1007; People v Breland, 145 A.D.2d 639, 640-641, lv denied 73 N.Y.2d 1011) and in admitting at trial testimony that defendant initially remained silent when warned of his rights (see, People v Conyers, 49 N.Y.2d 174, vacated 449 U.S. 809, initial decision adhered to on remand 52 N.Y.2d 454; People v Von Werne, 41 N.Y.2d 584; People v Larsen, 145 A.D.2d 976). Proof of defendant's guilt, however, was overwhelming. The evidence revealed that volatile liquids were used in setting the fire. Shortly before the fire, defendant threatened to kill his mother and he told his brother that the trailer was going to burn. He was the last person seen in the trailer before the fire and, just before the fire was discovered, he was seen in the area of the trailer. Under the circumstances, the errors were harmless as there was no reasonable possibility that they contributed to defendant's conviction (see, People v Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 237).
We also conclude that the court did not err in admitting the testimony of defendant's mother that, shortly before the fire, defendant threatened to kill her. Evidence of a prior bad act may be admitted where, as here, it is relevant on the issue of intent (see, People v Molineux, 168 N.Y. 264, 293; People v Roides, 124 A.D.2d 967, lv denied 69 N.Y.2d 886).