Opinion
09-27-2017
In the Matter of Philip WILLIAMS, appellant, v. APPEALS BOARD OF ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUDICATION BUREAU, State Department of Motor Vehicles, et al., respondents.
Philip Williams, Brooklyn, NY, appellant pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York, NY (Anisha S. Dasgupta and Matthew W. Grieco of counsel), for respondents.
Philip Williams, Brooklyn, NY, appellant pro se.
Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York, NY (Anisha S. Dasgupta and Matthew W. Grieco of counsel), for respondents.
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles Administrative Appeals Board dated December 31, 2013, which affirmed the denial of the petitioner's application for a new driver license, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vaughan, J.), dated February 26, 2015, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.Contrary to the petitioner's contention, the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles (hereinafter the DMV) properly evaluated the petitioner's June 2013 application for a new driver license pursuant to 15 NYCRR Part 136, amended 2012 (see Matter of McKevitt v. Fiala, 129 A.D.3d 730, 730–731, 10 N.Y.S.3d 554 ).
Moreover, the DMV's determination was not arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion (see Matter of Arrazola v. State of N.Y. Dept. of Motor Vehs., Appeals Bd., 129 A.D.3d 1444, 12 N.Y.S.3d 680 ).
The petitioner's remaining contentions are not properly before us, as many of them were raised for the first time in the petition and had not previously been brought to the attention of the DMV (see Matter of Solutions Economics, LLC v. Long Is. Power Auth., 97 A.D.3d 593, 595, 948 N.Y.S.2d 100 ; Matter of Pabon v. Phillips, 16 A.D.3d 589, 590, 790 N.Y.S.2d 879 ), while the rest are improperly raised for the first time on appeal (see Matter of Solutions Economics, LLC v. Long Is. Power Auth., 97 A.D.3d at 595, 948 N.Y.S.2d 100 ; Matter of Faison v. Goord, 298 A.D.2d 392, 393, 751 N.Y.S.2d 224 ).
MASTRO, J.P., CHAMBERS, MILLER and BARROS, JJ., concur.