Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We reject defendant's contention that the People failed to establish a sufficient chain of custody with respect to the paper napkin seized from defendant's vehicle. The record provides reasonable assurances of the identity and unchanged condition of the evidence (see, People v Julian, 41 N.Y.2d 340, 343). Therefore, any deficiencies in the chain of custody affect only the weight of the evidence, not its admissibility (see, People v Julian, supra, at 344; People v Donovan, 141 A.D.2d 835, 837, lv denied 72 N.Y.2d 1044; People v Piazza, 121 A.D.2d 573, 574, lv denied 68 N.Y.2d 916). Further, in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt, we conclude that any error in admitting the napkin into evidence was harmless (see, People v Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 240).
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621), we conclude that the proof was sufficient to support defendant's conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree.
The People concede that during summation the prosecutor improperly commented on defendant's failure to call his parole officer as a witness (see, People v Harris, 35 N.Y.2d 665). In the context of the entire summation, however, that isolated remark was harmless (see, People v Morgan, 66 N.Y.2d 255, 259).
We have examined defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.