Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
In light of the consent given by the defendant's mother to the police entry into their home, the warrantless arrest of the defendant therein was proper (see, People v. Harper, 119 A.D.2d 587, lv denied 68 N.Y.2d 757; cf., Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573, 583).
Moreover, the issue of the suggestiveness of the precinct identification of the defendant made by two witnesses to the crime was of minimal relevance, if any, since the testimony was more in the nature of a confirmation than an identification, in light of the testimony at the hearing by the two witnesses that they had known the defendant for 4 years and 1 1/2 years, respectively, prior to the incident (see, People v. Ingram, 110 A.D.2d 852, lv denied 66 N.Y.2d 615). Bracken, J.P., Kunzeman, Kooper and Spatt, JJ., concur.