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 determination that he violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1180 by speeding is supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Liuzzo v. State of New York, Dept. of Motor Vehicles Appeals Bd., 209 A.D.2d 618). The Administrative Law Judge properly relied on the patrol officer's testimony regarding his visual estimate of the speed of the petitioner's car, which was sufficient to confirm even an untested radar reading (see, Henig v. State of New York Dept. of Motor Vehicles, 122 A.D.2d 250). The officer's estimate, standing alone, would have been sufficient to sustain the petitioner's conviction (see, People v. Olsen, 22 N.Y.2d 230).
The petitioner's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for review or without merit.