DECISION JUDGMENT
ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.
Contrary to the petitioner's contention, the finding that he violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1180 by speeding is supported by substantial evidence ( see Matter of Neiman v. State of New York Dept. of Motor Vehicles Appeals Bd., 265 A.D.2d 558). The Administrative Law Judge properly relied on the patrol officer's testimony that he had been trained in visually estimating speed and his visual estimate of the speed of the petitioner's car, which, together with the reading from the calibrated speedometer in the officer's patrol car, were sufficient to sustain the petitioner's conviction ( see People v. Heyser, 2 N.Y.2d 390, 393-94; People v. Knight, 72 N.Y.2d 481, 488; Matter of Gentile v. Jackson, 273 A.D.2d 235).
The petitioner's remaining contentions either are unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
SANTUCCI, J.P., FLORIO, KRAUSMAN and SCHMIDT, JJ., concur.