Judgments affirmed.
There is ample evidence in the record to support the defendant's conviction under Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192 (2). The result of his breathalyzer test, which was admitted into evidence, demonstrated that his blood alcohol content was well in excess of the statutory limit. The prosecution clearly demonstrated that the officer who administered the test was qualified to do so, and that the test was properly performed in accordance with existing regulations. It was also established that the chemicals used were of the proper kind and mixed in the proper proportions. Accordingly, there was a sufficient basis for admitting the breathalyzer test result into evidence (see, People v Gower, 42 N.Y.2d 117; People v Donaldson, 36 A.D.2d 37). The defendant failed to raise any doubts concerning the accuracy and reliability of the breathalyzer's operation. Thus, we find that the evidence was sufficient in quality and quantity to justify the jury's finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Gruttola, 43 N.Y.2d 116, 122).
We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be either unpreserved or without merit. Gibbons, J.P., Thompson, Brown and Eiber, JJ., concur.