MacDonald v. Maine Bureau of Motor Vehicles
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
SUPERIOR COURT CIVIL ACTION DOCKET NO. AP-15-12 STATE OF MAINE CUMBERLAND, ss OWEN MACDONALD, Petitioner ORDER v. MAINE BUREAU OF MOTOR VEHICLES, RC. ',_,,~--l VC:D Respondent Before the court is petitioner Owen MacDonald's appeal from a March 30, 2015 decision by a Bureau of Motor Vehicles hearing examiner revoking MacDonald's license as a habitual offender. On an appeal under Rule 80C from a decision by a Bureau of Motor Vehicles hearing examiner, the court reviews the decision of the hearing examiner for abuse of discretion, error of law, or findings not supported by substantial evidence in the record. Turner v. Secretary of State, 2011 ME 22 ~ 8, 12 A.3d 1188; 5 M.R.S. § 11007(4)(C). The party seeking to overturn the 1 agency decision bears the burden of persuasion on appeal, and the agency's factual findings must be sustained unless clearly erroneous. 2011 ME 22 ~ 8. The court may not substitute its judgment for that of the agency on questions of fact. 5 M.R.S. § 11007(3). MacDonald's sole contention on this appeal is that because the record contains a certified copy of his driving record that does not show the necessary predicate for revocation as an 1 5 M.R.S. § 11 007( 4)(C) also calls for the court to reverse if the agency decision is in violation of constitutional or statutory provisions, is in excess of the agency's authority, was made upon unlawful procedure, or was affected by bias. § 11007(4)(C)(l)-(4). Petitioner does not raise any argument under those provisions of the statute. habitual offender, see Exhibit 5 at the BMV hearing, R. Tab 10, the hearing examiner's decision is not supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. The problem with this argument is that the record also contains a certified copy of MacDonald's driving record that contains far more information and that contains entries showing that MacDonald was revoked as a habitual offender on December 20, 2006, that his license was restored on August 17, 2011, and that he committed a new offense of OUr on August 16, 2014. See Exhibit 4 at the BMV hearing, R. Tab 9. Under 29-A M.R.S. § 2555(1), a person whose license has been revoked and restored shall have his license revoked again if he commits a new our offense within 5 years of the restoration. Based on Exhibit 4, the hearing examiner concluded at the March 30, 2015 that MacDonald qualified as a habitual offender. R. Tab. 5, Tr. 5-6. The hearing examiner was entitled to conclude that Exhibit 4 was the more complete and accurate driving history. So long as the record contains evidence supporting the hearing examiner's decision, the court is obliged to uphold that decision even ifthe record also contains contrary evidence. Dyer v. Superintendent of Insurance, 2013 ME 61 ,-r 11, 69 A.3d 416. The entry shall be: The March 30, 2015 decision of the Bureau of motor Vehicles revoking petitioner's license as a habitual offender is affirmed. The clerk is directed to incorporate this order in the docket by reference pursuant to Rule 79(a). Dated: November 10,2015 Thomas D. Warren Justice, Superior Court 2 OF COURTS er!and County Street, Ground Floor nd, ME04101 LUKE RIOUX, ESQ RIOUX, DONAHUE, CHMELECKI, & PELTIER, LLC. 97A EXCHANGE STREET, #404 PORTLAND, ME. 04101 t='o.r P\.o...\,..t ', .f( \OF COURTS Jerland County r Street, Ground Floor tnd, ME 04101 DONALD W. MACOMBER, AAG. 6 STATE HOUSE STATION AUGUSTA, ME. 04333 I=Q,.. J>.e..FQJ'\ J~
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
