 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Nelson11/12/1999
defendants from driving "by finding express legislative authority to a sentencing Judge to restrict [driving] privileges." Id. at 1177. But the court reasoned that the Maryland legislature's provision of specific mechanisms and safeguards for reinstatement of suspended licenses delegated exclusive authority over suspension of driving privileges to the administrative agency specifically charged with that duty, and not with the trial courts. See id. at 1180-81.
The same rationale should apply in Vermont. Vermont law sets forth well-defined procedures for suspending and reinstating driver's licenses, and further gives the Commissioner exclusive authority to implement those procedures. Allowing Judges to devise ad hoc probation conditions that amount to de facto suspensions threatens the integrity of this statutory scheme. The majority suggests that the challenged condition was reasonable, but a reasonableness inquiry is irrelevant because it presupposes the authority of the court to impose such a condition. See City of Independence v. Tector, 688 N.E.2d 276, 278 (Ohio Ct. App. 1996). When there is a detailed statutory scheme delegating regulation of procedures to an administrative agency, the general judicial power to impose reasonable probation conditions is limited. Accordingly, I would strike the challenged condition.
The tragic consequences of defendant's reckless conduct may suggest to some that the trial court should be allowed unlimited latitude in fashioning probation conditions to control his future behavior, and that defendant "deserves" any and all sanctions the court might impose, including a potential thirty-year de facto suspension of his driver's license. The issue in this case, however, is not whether the challenged probation condition was reasonable, but rather whether the district court has the authority to impose its own term of license suspension on defendant when the Legislature, precisely because Judges were imposing inconsistent sanctions and thus undermining the effectiveness of Vermont's DUI laws, explicitly and emphatically granted the Commissioner exclusive jurisdiction over license suspension, revocation and reinstatement.
I am authorized to say that Justice Dooley joins in this Dissent.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Vermont DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|