 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Simmons v. Director of Revenue10/26/1999
This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.
Appeal From: Circuit Court of Butler County, Hon. John A. Clark
John C. Crow, Presiding Judge
Opinion Vote: REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS. Parrish and Shrum, JJ., concur.
On January 7, 1998, Corporal B. G. Matthews of the Missouri State Highway Patrol arrested Angela L. Simmons for driving while intoxicated. Matthews requested Simmons to submit to a chemical test of her breath for the purpose of determining the alcohol content of her blood. See: section 577.020. Simmons refused. Consequently, the Director of Revenue ("Director") revoked Simmons's license to operate a motor vehicle for one year. See: section 577.041.
Simmons petitioned for a hearing under section 577.041.4. At the hearing, Director (represented by an assistant prosecuting attorney, section 577.041.4) presented one witness: Matthews. Simmons presented no evidence other than testimony adduced from Matthews by her lawyer on cross-examination.
The statute authorizing the hearing, section 577.041, provides, inter alia:
"4. . . . At the hearing the Judge shall determine only:
(1) Whether or not the person was arrested;
(2) Whether or not the arresting officer had reasonable grounds to believe that the person was driving a motor vehicle while in an intoxicated condition; and
(3) Whether or not the person refused to submit to the test.
5. If the Judge determines any issue not to be in the affirmative, he shall order the director to reinstate the license or permit to drive."
Following the hearing, the trial court announced it would "take this matter under advisement[.]"
The trial court ultimately entered judgment setting aside Director's revocation of Simmons's license. The judgment was predicated on a finding that Matthews's arrest of Simmons "was not based upon reasonable grounds to believe that [Simmons] was operating a motor vehicle while in an intoxicated condition." Director appeals from that judgment.
In Berry v. Director of Revenue, 885 S.W.2d 326 (Mo. banc 1994), Director revoked a driver's license for one year pursuant to an earlier version of section 577.041. Id. There, as here, the trial court vacated the revocation and ordered reinstatement of the license. Id. On appeal by Director, the driver argued, inter alia, that the trial court implicitly found there were no reasonable grounds for the arresting officer to believe the driver was driving while intoxicated. Id. at 328.
The opinion in Berry explained that the trial court had the prerogative to accept or reject all, part, or none of the testimony, and that the judgment was to be affirmed under any reasonable theory supported by the evidence. Id. Nonetheless, the Supreme Court reversed the trial court because, according to the Supreme Court, there was no evidentiary support in the record for a finding that the arresting officer lacked reasonable grounds to arrest the driver for driving while intoxicated. Id. That is the issue framed by section 577.041.4(2) -- the same issue the trial court in the instant case resolved against Director.
Accordingly, this court's task is to determine whether Director is correct in maintaining there was no evidentiary support for the trial court's finding that Matthews's arrest of Simmons was not based on reasonable grounds to believe she was operating a motor vehicle while in an intoxicated condition.
In the trial court, Simmons challenged the sufficiency of Director's evidence in two respects. Simmons's first attac
Page 1 2 3 4 Missouri DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|