Appeal from a judgment of the Justice Court of the Town of Mount Hope, Orange County (Joseph R. Hosking, J.), rendered July 15, 2003. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of two counts of driving while intoxicated.

Judgment of conviction affirmed.

Defendant was convicted, after a jury trial, of two counts of driving while intoxicated (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192 [2], [3]). Viewing the evidence as summarized in the justice's return in the light most favorable to the People (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish all of the elements of both counts of driving while intoxicated beyond a reasonable doubt. The proof established that defendant failed field sobriety tests at the scene, that he admitted to having had six alcoholic beverages at a bar and that his blood alcohol content reading was .15% on a breathalyzer test. Such evidence was ample to prove intoxication (see People v Stiffler, 237 AD2d 753 [1997]). Moreover, we are of the view that the evidence as set forth in the justice's return adequately supports the finding that defendant committed the offense at a proscribed location (see Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192 [7]) and note that defendant has failed to preserve his challenge to the sufficiency of the trial court's return by not moving, pursuant to CPL 460.10 (3) (e), to require the filing of an amended return" (People v Knight, 72 NY2d 481, 488 [1988]).

We are also of the view that the verdict should not be set aside as against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]; People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342 [2007]; People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]).

The other contentions raised on appeal are similarly lacking in merit.

Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Rudolph, P.J., Scheinkman and LaCava, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: April 07, 2009