Opinion
1945
October 23, 2003.
Determination of respondents, dated September 14, 2001, which, after an administrative hearing, found petitioner guilty of speeding in a traffic zone in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1180(d) and following too closely behind another vehicle in violation of Vehicle Traffic Law § 1229(a), unanimously confirmed, the petition denied, and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR Article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [Walter Tolub, J.], entered on or about May 8, 2002), dismissed, with costs.
Ronald Paul Hart, for petitioner.
Carol Fischer, for respondents.
Before: Buckley, P.J., Nardelli, Sullivan, Williams, Lerner, JJ.
The testimony of the officer who stopped petitioner for speeding as to his expertise in visually assessing vehicle speeds and as to his observations respecting the speed of petitioner's vehicle and its manner of operation just prior to the stop, constituted substantial evidence in support of the traffic infractions petitioner was found to have committed (see People v. Olsen, 22 N.Y.2d 230, 231; Matter of DeOliveira v. New York State Dept. of Motor Vehs., 271 A.D.2d 607).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.