Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the verdict is not supported by legally sufficient evidence is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245, 250). In any event, we find that the evidence, viewed in a light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see, Penal Law § 125.15; People v Heinsohn, 92 A.D.2d 574, affd 61 N.Y.2d 855). The evidence at trial established that the defendant drove a stolen car approximately 69 miles per hour in a 30 miles per hour zone, passed a red light, and drove onto the sidewalk during rush hour in a heavily populated area, to avoid being caught by the police. The defendant then swerved to avoid hitting another car and drove onto the sidewalk a second time. The defendant lost control of the car and struck and killed a four-year-old child who was riding his bicycle on the sidewalk. The car dragged the child approximately 15 feet and finally stopped in front of a supermarket. The defendant immediately fled from the scene, discarding his clothing as he ran from the police. Moreover, the jury's verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15; Vehicle and Traffic Law § 600 [a], [b]).

The defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, are unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, are without merit. Bracken, J.P., Balletta, Miller and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.