Florida DUI refusal license suspension reversed by appeals court

A Florida appellate court has reversed an implied consent license suspension in DUI case where the Administrative Law Judge failed to consider the legality of the petitioner’s arrest.

The Cite: District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District. William HERNANDEZ, Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, Respondent. No. 1D08-1424. Nov. 21, 2008. See Hernandez v. Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles.

The Holding: This court's review is limited to determining whether the circuit court afforded procedural due process and applied the correct law. Haines City Cmty. Dev. v. Heggs, 658 So.2d 523 (Fla.1995). Section 316.1932 unambiguously provides that a driver has impliedly consented to submit to a breath or blood test only when such is incidental to a lawful arrest. Given this clear statement of law, the circuit court here erred when it held that the DHSMV hearing officer did not err when it failed to consider the legality of Hernandez' arrest. We therefore grant the petition for writ of certiorari, quash the circuit court's order denying certiorari relief and remand the cause to the circuit court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

My Comments: Good ruling. Often times bad rulings from ALJs go unchecked because the cost of an appeal outweighs the potential benefit. The DUI defense lawyers in this case did an excellent job and the appeals judge made the right decision.

DMV Hearings - Claims that they are rigged in California

In a post today, Lawrence Taylor of duiblog.com made the assertion that DMV hearings in California May be rigged. The basics are that the head hearing officer issued a scathing memo berating judges for bad decisions allowing people to keep their licenses.

The judges or hearing officers who listen to these cases are supposed to be neutral. It is a basic premise of due process. Typically, administrative law judges decisions are reviewable by an appeals court, not the supervisor in the office.

The memo quoted in Mr. Taylor's post makes it sound like the lower ALJ's jobs may be in danger if the boss doesn't agree with their rulings. However, there is no hint that the boss would be reviewing cases where the ALJ suspended the driver's license, only those where no suspension was issued.

The conclusion to be drawn, if the memo is authentic, is that any ALJ in that office that wants to keep his or her job secure would be best served by issuing suspensions, since non-suspensions would be reviewed.

If this is true it is a shameful slap in the face of lawyers and judges who work hard to maintain our justice system, along with due process. No matter which side you are aligned with in the great drunk driving divide, nobody with any legal training who cares about our system could, with clear conscience, condone this memo.