 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Presteng v. Director6/5/1998
ector, North Dakota Dep't of Transp., 1997 ND 193, , 569 N.W.2d 273.
We also examine the record compiled before the agency. Baer v. Director, North Dakota Dep't of Transp., 1997 ND 222, , 571 N.W.2d 829. We give great deference to administrative agency rulings, and we must affirm the agency's decision if:
(1) the findings of fact are supported by a preponderance of the evidence; (2) the Conclusions of law are sustained by the findings of fact; (3) the decision is supported by the Conclusions of law; and (4) the decision is in accordance with the law.
Id. "'We do not make independent findings of fact or substitute our judgment for that of the agency, but we determine only whether a reasoning mind could reasonably have determined the facts or Conclusions were supported by the weight of the evidence.'" Wheeling, 1997 ND 193, , 569 N.W.2d 273. The ultimate Conclusion, however, of whether the facts rise to the level of probable cause is a question of law, which is fully reviewable on appeal. Id.
III.
[ ] The dispositive issue in this case is whether the agency's findings of fact support the Conclusion that the police officer had probable cause to arrest Presteng for driving under the influence . Although two other issues were raised by the Department, these issues were conceded by Presteng at oral argument.
[ ] Probable cause is a question of law and exists "when the facts and circumstances that a police officer knows or that he has reasonably trustworthy information about warrant a person of reasonable caution to believe that an offense has been or is being committed." Wilhelmi v. Director of Dept. of Transp., 498 N.W.2d 150, 156 (N.D. 1993). An officer need not have "knowledge or facts sufficient to establish guilt." Baer, 1997 ND 222, , 571 N.W.2d 829. We have provided two elements necessary for establishing probable cause to arrest a driver for driving under the influence : the law enforcement officer must (1) first observe some signs of physical or mental impairment, and (2) have reason to believe the driver's impairment is caused by alcohol. Id.
[ ] In this case, the arresting officer was investigating a two-snowmobile accident involving Presteng. We have previously found probable cause to arrest for driving under the influence where there has been an accident coupled with other evidence of alcohol consumption. See Wilhelmi, 498 N.W.2d at 156; Moser v. North Dakota State Highway Comm'r, 369 N.W.2d 650, 653 (N.D. 1985) (additionally considering a lack of any suggestion of another cause of a vehicle roll-over). The fact an accident occurred is at least suggestive of impairment even though there may be other factors which are relevant to the actual cause of the accident. As we have clearly stated:
While other causes of an accident are relevant to the ultimate weight of the evidence at trial, other possible causes do not negat the reasonableness of a belief that alcohol probably contributed to an accident when there is reasonable evidence of alcohol consumption. The inquiry is whether the officer had reason to believe that unlawful activity probably occurred, not whether there is sufficient evidence for a criminal conviction.
Wilhelmi, 498 N.W.2d at 156.
[ ] Here, in addition to the evidence of the snowmobile collision, the arresting officer did observe such reasonable evidence of alcohol consumption while interviewing Presteng at the hospital. The officer testified at the administrative hearing that during this hospital encounter, he detected a strong odor of an alcoholic beverage on Presteng's breath. Furthermore, in the Officer's Statement of Probable Cause contained in an exhibit
Page 1 2 3 North Dakota DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|