 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Wilson v. State ex rel Department of Public Safety12/28/1999
Appellant, the State of Oklahoma ex rel. Department of Public Safety, seeks review of the trial court's order setting aside the Department's revocation of Appellee David Wilson's driver's license. Based on the record and applicable law, we reverse and remand for further proceedings.
The essential and undisputed facts are that at about two in the morning on October 16, 1998, a passing motorist notified two City of Purcell police officers that a car had gone into a ditch near an off-ramp on Interstate 35. The officers drove to the scene and found a Chevrolet Suburban stuck on top of a cement culvert in a drainage ditch, with the rear bumper up on the ground and the rear tires spinning and kicking up dirt. Wilson was behind the wheel, gunning the engine.
The officers followed several hundred feet of skid marks from the vehicle back to the highway, finding a portion of the truck's rearview mirror next to a support pillar and noticing paint transfer from the vehicle on the pillar and a guardrail. According to one of the officers, this evidence indicated that the vehicle skidded off the ramp into the guardrail, struck the support pillar, swerved first to the left and then to the right, then slid off into the drainage ditch, hitting the culvert.
The officer testified he yelled to the driver to turn off the engine. Wilson responded, "I'm trying to get out of the ditch." The officer yelled again and when he received no response, reached in and turned the motor off. The officer then noticed a very strong odor of alcohol on Wilson's breath. The officer asked Wilson to get out of the truck. With some difficulty, Wilson removed his seat belt and got out. Then, according to the officer:
As he got out of the vehicle, he took about two steps, fell right to the ground. At that time, Officer Yingling and I picked him up, and I--at that time is when I asked him--I said, "Have you been drinking?" And he said, "Not much."
Q.So then what did you do?
A.I then asked Mr. Wilson if he'd had anything to drink since the accident. He said, "What accident?" I was just--I have to look again here. He said, "What accident? I didn't have any accident. I'm stuck."
The officer placed Wilson under arrest for driving under the influence . He took Wilson to the McClain County Sheriff's Department, where Wilson consented to a breathalyzer test. The results showed a .17 alcohol concentration, which is over the legal limit.
The Department subsequently revoked Wilson's driver's license. Wilson demanded an administrative hearing and the Department sustained the revocation. Wilson then filed a petition for a trial de novo in district court.
The trial court held a hearing in which only the two officers testified. Following their testimony, Wilson demurred, asserting the officers had insufficient grounds to arrest him because his vehicle was inoperable at the time they arrived and because no evidence showed who was driving the car at the time of the accident. The trial court then set aside the revocation, stating it was doing so because "there is no credible evidence the vehicle Plaintiff was found seated in was operable." The Department appeals.
The scope of a revocation hearing includes "the issues of whether the officer had reasonable grounds to believe the person had been operating or was in actual physical control of a vehicle upon the public roads, highways, streets, turnpikes or other public place of this state while under the influence of alcohol . . . and whether the person was placed under arrest." 47 O.S. Supp. 1999 § 754(F). Thus, Oklahoma law requires, and appellate courts have consistently
Page 1 2 3 Oklahoma DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|