IN RE SHARF v. NEW YORK DEPT. OF MOTOR VEH

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.

A review of the record clearly demonstrates that the findings of the administrative law judge are supported by substantial evidence ( see Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 NY2d 222, 231-232). The evidence adduced at the hearing demonstrated that the police had reasonable grounds to believe that the petitioner had been driving in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192, that the police lawfully arrested the petitioner, that the police gave the petitioner sufficient warning of the consequences of refusing to submit to a chemical test, and that the petitioner refused to submit to the chemical test ( see Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1194 [c]; Matter of Liebel v Jackson, 261 AD2d 474).

The petitioner's remaining contention is not properly before this Court, as it was not raised at the administrative hearing ( see Matter of Gonzalez v State Liq. Auth., 30 NY2d 108, 112; Matter of Myles v Boar, 24 AD3d 677, 678; Matter of Ambery v Board of Trustees of NY. City Fire Dept, Art. I-B Pension Fund, 298 AD2d 582).