Judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered January 5, 1967, convicting defendant of possession of burglar's instruments as a felony and burglary in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence, affirmed. In our opinion, proof of statements made by defendant to a private individual was not rendered inadmissible merely because that individual failed to give him the warnings required by Miranda v. Arizona ( 384 U.S. 436). (Cf. Schaumberg v. State, 432 P.2d 500 [Nev.]; Yates v. United States, 384 F.2d 586; People v. Gray, 28 A.D.2d 1079; People v. Horman, 29 A.D.2d 569; People v. Frank, 52 Misc.2d 266.) In view of the overwhelming proof of defendant's guilt, any error in the admission of testimony by a police officer as to a statement by defendant, in the absence of the Miranda warnings, may be disregarded under section 542 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (cf. Guyette v. State, 438 P.2d 244 [Nev.]). Similarly, any error in the admission of testimony that defendant stood mute when asked a question did not prejudice his substantial rights and may also be disregarded as harmless ( People v. Rutigliano, 261 N.Y. 103, 107). Beldock, P.J., Christ, Brennan, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur.