ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
01-2-4940 Holloway v. New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission, App. Div. (per curiam) (9 pp.) Marc Holloway appeals the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission’s (MVC) final “Order of Suspension” suspending his driving privileges for 240 days. He argues that the MVC improperly assessed him points for a violation that he alleges carried no points; that he did not receive notice to attend a hearing scheduled by the Office of Administrative Law (OAL); and that a suspension would impose an undue hardship on him and his family. The appellate panel affirms, finding the MVC’s suspension of Holloway’s license was amply supported by his accumulation of excessive motor vehicle points and his driving record. Since the 240 day suspension falls within the parameters of the governing statute and regulations and in light of Holloway’s unfortunate driving history, the panel finds no abuse of discretion. While the loss of driving privileges imposes upon Holloway and those who rely upon him for transportation, the operation of a motor vehicle is a privilege and not a right. In addition, Holloway’s persistent failure to abide by the traffic laws imposes a risk upon other travelers. The panel rejects Holloway’s claim that the four points assessed for his latest unsafe driving violation were not consistent with the law or his expectation when he pled guilty. By signing the affidavit pleading guilty, Holloway indicated that he understood he could be convicted as a repeat offender. Also, while Holloway claims he did not receive the OAL notice scheduling the hearing, there is no dispute that he received all other notices sent by the MVC and OAL to the same address. Holloway has not presented any evidence to overcome the presumption of receipt.
