IN RE: Marvin NEIMAN (1999)

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the State of New York Dept. of Motor Vehicles Appeals Board, dated April 9, 1998, which affirmed a determination of an Administrative Law Judge which, after a hearing, inter alia, found the petitioner guilty of violating Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1180(d).

ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.

 Judicial review of a determination rendered by an administrative body after a hearing is limited to whether that determination is supported by substantial evidence upon the entire record (see, Matter of Lahey v. Kelly, 71 N.Y.2d 135; 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v. State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176, 408 N.Y.S.2d 54, 379 N.E.2d 1183;  Matter of Martin v. Adduci, 138 A.D.2d 599, 526 N.Y.S.2d 181).   The ticketing police officer, properly referring to his notes (see, People v. Klepper, 25 N.Y.2d 46, 48, 302 N.Y.S.2d 555, 250 N.E.2d 51;  Matter of Pernick v. New York State Dept. of Motor Vehicles, 217 A.D.2d 630, 629 N.Y.S.2d 783), testified that based upon his training and expertise, he estimated the petitioner's speed at 76 miles per hour in a posted 50-mile-per-hour zone (see, People v. Olsen, 22 N.Y.2d 230, 292 N.Y.S.2d 420, 239 N.E.2d 354;  Matter of Howe v. Adduci, 226 A.D.2d 377, 640 N.Y.S.2d 225) and that this visual estimate was verified by radar (see, Matter of Pernick v. New York State Dept. of Motor Vehicles, supra).   Contrary to the petitioner's contentions, the officer's testimony was not incredible as a matter law.   Furthermore, while the petitioner's testimony called into question the police officer's version of the facts, where room for choice exists, it is beyond the scope of this court to weigh the evidence or reject the choice made by the Administrative Law Judge (see, Matter of Kandekore v. Commissioner of Motor Vehicles, 225 A.D.2d 774, 640 N.Y.S.2d 151;  Matter of Liuzzo v. State of New York Dept. of Motor Vehicles Appeals Bd., 209 A.D.2d 618, 619 N.Y.S.2d 654;  Matter of Gatto v. Adduci, 182 A.D.2d 760, 582 N.Y.S.2d 490).

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.