Court Opinion

ID: 9556702
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-18 05:10:07.611937+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:01:37.876129
License: Public Domain

If this opinion indicates that it is “FOR PUBLICATION,” it is subject to
                  revision until final publication in the Michigan Appeals Reports.

                           STATE OF MICHIGAN

                            COURT OF APPEALS

BRANDON JON HARVEY,                                                    UNPUBLISHED
                                                                       August 17, 2023
               Petitioner-Appellant,

v                                                                      No. 362541
                                                                       Allegan Circuit Court
SECRETARY OF STATE,                                                    LC No. 2022-065497-AL

               Respondent-Appellee.

Before: YATES, P.J., and BORRELLO and PATEL, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

       Petitioner, proceeding in propria persona, appeals as of right the circuit court’s order
denying petitioner’s appeal of the suspension, revocation, or denial of his driver’s license for being
untimely pursuant to MCR 7.120(B)(1) and MCL 257.323(1). For the reasons set forth in this
opinion, we affirm.

        On April 4, 2022, petitioner filed an appeal in the circuit court requesting review of the
action of the Secretary of State dated April 28, 2018, that resulted in the suspension, restriction, or
denial of petitioner’s driving privileges. Petitioner indicated that he was appealing the “record
pursuant to MCL 257.323(4)” and that he was requesting that the circuit court set aside the
Secretary of State’s action for being contrary to law and unsupported by competent, material, and
substantial evidence. The circuit court entered an order denying petitioner’s appeal without a
hearing because it was untimely filed. The circuit court reasoned:

               Petitioner’s Appeal of Suspension, Revocation, or Denial of Driver’s
       License is denied due to the appeal not being timely filed pursuant to MCR
       7.120(B)(1). MCR 7.120(B)(1) provides that the time for filing an appeal is
       governed by MCL 257.323(1). In relevant part, MCL 257.323(1) provides that the
       petition shall be filed “within 63 days after the determination is made except that
       for good cause shown the court may allow the person to file petition within 182
       days after the determination is made.” The petition in this matter was filled more
       than three years after the determination was made. Therefore, the petitioner’s
       appeal is DENIED.

                                                 -1-
       The circuit court denied petitioner’s motion for reconsideration, and this appeal followed.

        Notwithstanding petitioner’s myriad of complaints, primarily focused on relitigating the
merits of his drunk-driving convictions stretching back to 2005, the sole issue for this Court to
resolve on appeal is whether the circuit court erred by dismissing petitioner’s appeal for being
untimely. This issue presents a question of law involving the application of a statute. Questions
of law, including issues of statutory interpretation, are reviewed de novo on appeal. DenBoer v
Lakola Med Control Auth, 240 Mich App 498, 500; 618 NW2d 8 (2000).

         “[A]ppeals to the circuit court under the Michigan Vehicle Code, MCL 257.1 et seq., from
a final determination by the Secretary of State pertaining to an operator’s license . . .” are governed
by MCR 7.120. MCR 7.120(A). Under the court rule, the “time for filing an appeal of right is
governed by MCL 257.323(1).” MCR 7.120(B)(1). In turn, MCL 257.323(1) provides in relevant
part as follows:

               (1) A person aggrieved by a final determination of the secretary of state
       denying the person an operator’s or chauffeur’s license, a vehicle group
       designation, or an indorsement on a license or revoking, suspending, or restricting
       an operator’s or chauffeur’s license, vehicle group designation, or an indorsement
       may petition for a review of the determination in the circuit court in the county
       where the person was arrested if the denial or suspension was imposed under
       section 625f or under the order of a trial court under section 328 or, in all other
       cases, in the circuit court in the person’s county of residence. The person shall file
       the petition within 63 days after the determination is made except that for good
       cause shown the court may allow the person to file petition within 182 days after
       the determination is made. . . . [Emphasis added.]

       Here, petitioner filed an appeal on April 4, 2022, in the circuit court expressly stating that
he requested review of the action of the Secretary of State dated April 28, 2018, that resulted in
the suspension, restriction, or denial of petitioner’s driving privileges. Petitioner filed his appeal
almost four years after the relevant determination, which is well more than the statutory period of
63 days, as well as the 182-day period that is permissible for good cause shown. MCL 257.323(1).
Therefore, petitioner’s appeal was untimely and the circuit court did not err by dismissing the
action. Having made such a determination, we need not consider the remainder of petitioner’s
arguments.

Affirmed.

                                                               /s/ Christopher P. Yates
                                                               /s/ Stephen L. Borrello
                                                               /s/ Sima G. Patel

                                                 -2-