Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contentions, the evidence adduced at bar amply established her accessorial conduct with respect to the possession and attempted use of a stolen credit card (see, Penal Law § 20.00). The record discloses that, with knowledge of the unlawful plan to utilize the card, the defendant participated in the theft by providing transportation to the retail establishments involved and, thereafter, by helping to gather the articles of clothing subsequently purchased with the stolen card.
Finally, the defendant argues that the court erred in denying that branch of her omnibus motion to suppress certain oral statements. We find nothing in the record which suggests that the court erred in determining that the defendant's statements were made after a voluntary and knowing waiver of her rights, and that they had not been induced by threats or promises (see, People v Gee, 104 A.D.2d 561, lv denied 64 N.Y.2d 759). Brown, J.P., Rubin, Kooper and Sullivan, JJ., concur.