Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The trial court properly exercised its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to withdraw his pleas of guilty. The record reveals that the defendant voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently entered his pleas of guilty (see, People v Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9) and that he readily made full factual allocutions admitting his guilt of the crimes (see, People v Parilla, 135 A.D.2d 745; People v. Williams, 145 A.D.2d 672). The defendant's assertion of coercion was properly rejected (see, People v. Doherty, 134 A.D.2d 513; People v. Stubbs, 110 A.D.2d 725).
Moreover, we find no basis for disturbing the hearing court's finding that the witness's identification of the defendant while handcuffed and in a police vehicle (see, People v. Session, 143 A.D.2d 233; People v. Dennis, 125 A.D.2d 325; People v. Johnson, 102 A.D.2d 616) and in the presence of recovered property (cf., People v. Brown, 143 A.D.2d 524), was not impermissibly suggestive. Furthermore, the court correctly ruled that there was an independent basis for the witness's in-court identification of the defendant (see, People v. Riley, 70 N.Y.2d 523).
Finally, inasmuch as the statements made by the defendant at the precinct were volunteered and not made in response to police interrogation (see, People v. Kaye, 25 N.Y.2d 139; People v Wade, 143 A.D.2d 703, 707; People v. Sanders, 79 A.D.2d 688, 689), we perceive no impropriety in the court's ruling finding them to be admissible (cf., People v. Bethea, 67 N.Y.2d 364).
We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Thompson, J.P., Lawrence, Rubin and Balletta, JJ., concur.