Opinion
February 4, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Monroe County, Bergin, J.
Present — Denman, P.J., Callahan, Balio, Fallon and Davis, JJ.
Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The suppression court properly refused to suppress defendant's pretrial statements. The record establishes that defendant voluntarily agreed to accompany police officers for further questioning at the police station. That consent is a valid substitute for probable cause (see, People v. Hodge, 44 N.Y.2d 553, 559) and obviates the need to consider whether defendant was in custody or seized in the constitutional sense at the time he made statements to an officer and whether the police had reasonable suspicion to justify defendant's detention (see, People v. Langdon, 188 A.D.2d 1036, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 1015; People v. Denis, 181 A.D.2d 1017, 1018, lv denied 79 N.Y.2d 1048). Neither the frisk of defendant, which was undertaken as a safety measure before defendant was asked to accompany the police to the station, nor the fact that the police administered Miranda warnings before questioning defendant at the station, warrants a finding that defendant was in custody when the initial statement was made (see, People v Allen, 73 N.Y.2d 378 [frisk]; People v. Oates, 104 A.D.2d 907, 911 [administration of warnings]).