Opinion
December 8, 1986
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lagana, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Consideration of the six factors set forth in People v. Green ( 103 A.D.2d 362, 363-364) leads us to conclude, contrary to the hearing court that exigent circumstances existed at the time of the defendant's arrest. Therefore, the warrantless arrest of the defendant must be deemed proper. The defendant's statement, given in response to a police officer's inquiry approximately two hours after his arrest and less than two hours after the defendant was initially advised of his Miranda rights, was made after a proper waiver of those rights and was therefore admissible (see, People v. Glinsman, 107 A.D.2d 710).
Although the supplemental instruction given by the trial court in response to a question from the jury seeking clarification of the definition of intent may have been more particularized than the question warranted, we conclude that the supplemental instruction must be considered nonprejudicial and harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt.
We have considered the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Niehoff, J.P., Rubin, Eiber and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.