 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Buckley v. Director of Revenue9/21/1999
r v. Director of Revenue, 943 S.W.2d 279, 280 (Mo. App. E.D. 1997). We will affirm the trial court's findings and the judgment unless there is no substantial evidence to support it, it is against the weight of the evidence, or it erroneously declares or applies the law. Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30, 32 (Mo. banc 1976). In determining if there is substantial evidence, we defer to the ability of the trial court to ascertain the facts and to Judge the credibility of the witnesses. Thurmond v. Director of Revenue, 759 S.W.2d 898, 899 (Mo. App. E.D. 1988). The trial court is afforded wide discretion even if there is evidence in the record which would support a different result. Id. Furthermore, the trial court may accept or reject all, part or none of the testimony of any witness. Id.; Hawk v. Director of Revenue, 943 S.W.2d 18, 20 (Mo. App. S.D. 1997). Driver's testimony would have supported an opposite result. See, Moore v. Lohman, 962 S.W. 2d 917 (Mo. App. S.D. 1998). But here, the trial court was not required to believe Driver's testimony and could properly rely upon the Alcohol Influence Report, which indicated the arresting officer had given Driver the proper warnings. Point denied.
We affirm.
Separate Opinion: None
Page 1 2 Missouri DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|