Opinion
July 17, 1995
Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed, on the merits, with costs.
The determination that the petitioner violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1180 (d) is supported by substantial evidence on the record and therefore must be confirmed (see, Matter of Martin v. Adduci, 138 A.D.2d 599). The ticketing police officer testified, properly referring to his notes (see, People v Klepper, 25 N.Y.2d 46), that based upon his training and expertise, he estimated the petitioner's speed at 50 miles per hour in a posted 30-mile-per-hour zone (see, People v. Olsen, 22 N.Y.2d 230; People v. Praete, 144 Misc.2d 801, affd 150 Misc.2d 389) and that this visual estimate was verified by radar. The officer's testimony was not incredible as a matter of law and was thus sufficient to sustain the respondent's burden of proving the petitioner's guilt by clear and convincing evidence (see, Matter of Miranda v. Adduci, 172 A.D.2d 526; Matter of Martin v. Adduci, 138 A.D.2d 599, supra; Matter of Kahn v. State of N.Y. Dept. of Motor Vehicles, 134 A.D.2d 595).
We have reviewed the petitioner's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Miller, J.P., Altman, Goldstein and Florio, JJ., concur.