Defendant's motion to suppress identification testimony was properly denied. The showup was justified by its close temporal and spatial proximity to the crime and the desirability of obtaining a prompt and reliable identification ( People v. Davis, 232 A.D.2d 154, lv denied 89 N.Y.2d 941). The circumstances that defendant was handcuffed and in the presence of police officers did not render the identification unduly suggestive ( People v. Anthony, 249 A.D.2d 102, lv denied 92 N.Y.2d 878). Furthermore, even assuming that the police had made the complainant aware that he was being asked to view suspects arrested in the getaway car for which the complainant had provided a license plate number only minutes previously, this would not have tainted the identification because the complainant would have expected such a circumstance on the basis of his own common sense ( People v. Stafford, 215 A.D.2d 212, lv denied 86 N.Y.2d 784; see also, People v. Rodriguez, 64 N.Y.2d 738, 740-741).

Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach and Mazzarelli, JJ.