Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the prosecution failed to present reasonable assurances as to the identity and the unchanged condition, inter alia, of the numerous vials containing cocaine recovered from the crime scene shortly after the sale is without merit (see, People v Julian, 41 N.Y.2d 340, 343; People v Carroll, 181 A.D.2d 904; People v Williams, 170 A.D.2d 629). Contrary to the defendant's contention, the fact that the police chemist who initially analyzed the contents of vials did not testify at trial is not fatal to establishing the "chain of custody" with respect to the admitted vials (see, People v Cummings, 184 A.D.2d 574; see also, People v Moyer, 186 A.D.2d 997, 998). Moreover, deficiencies in the "chain of custody" did not bar the admission of the vials, but rather only involved the weight to be accorded to that evidence (see, People v Julian, supra; People v Carroll, supra; People v Donovan, 141 A.D.2d 835).
The defendant's contentions that certain comments by the court during the course of the trial and during its instructions to the jury, and certain remarks by the prosecutor during his summation, deprived him of a fair trial are either unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v Medina, 53 N.Y.2d 951, 953) or without merit (see, e.g., People v Roopchand, 107 A.D.2d 35, affd 65 N.Y.2d 837; People v Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396). Thompson, J.P., Pizzuto, Santucci and Goldstein, JJ., concur.