Judgment affirmed.
We have reviewed the record and find that the suppression court properly concluded that the hospital room showup was not improper under the circumstances (see, People v Soto, 87 A.D.2d 618). In such instances, one-on-one confrontations which occur in close spatial and temporal proximity to the crime are indicative of good police work aimed at apprehending the perpetrator and releasing innocent suspects as soon as possible, as the witness's memory is most fresh at that time (see, People v Love, 57 N.Y.2d 1023; People v Cole, 100 A.D.2d 442; People v Brnja, 70 A.D.2d 17, affd 50 N.Y.2d 366). Moreover, in the case at bar, the People proved by clear and convincing evidence that there was a reliable independent source for each witness's identification of defendant (see, Manson v Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 98).
There is also no merit to defendant's claim that the sentencing court erroneously adjudicated him a second felony offender. He failed to prove by substantial evidence that the prior conviction based upon his guilty plea was unconstitutionally obtained (see, People v Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9, 15).
We have considered appellant's pro se argument that the sentence imposed was excessive and find it to be without merit. Mollen, P.J., Niehoff, Rubin and Lawrence, JJ., concur.