Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The suppression court's determination that the statements defendant made to the police were voluntary is supported by the record. Defendant does not challenge the admissions he made at the scene of the accident prior to being advised of his Miranda rights. These investigatory inquiries did not constitute custodial interrogation to which Miranda v Arizona ( 384 U.S. 436) applies (People v Bennett, 70 N.Y.2d 891, 893; People v Sullivan, 149 A.D.2d 968). With respect to defendant's other admissions made at the hospital after he had been advised of his Miranda rights, we find no evidence in the record to support defendant's claim that the injuries he sustained in the accident prevented him from knowingly and voluntarily waiving his rights (see, People v Hall, 122 A.D.2d 163; People v Pearson, 106 A.D.2d 588).
We have reviewed the other claims raised on appeal and find them to be without merit.