 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Mcdonald v. Dept. of Revenue & Taxation2/5/1993
The threshold question presented in this case is whether a driver's record, maintained in an electronic database, then reproduced on paper in the form of an abstract and certified by the custodian as such, is admissible in an administrative proceeding to revoke a driver's license as a record kept in the usual course of business for purposes of the business records exception to the hearsay rule, or as a public record for purposes of the public records exception to the hearsay rule. A related and tandem question is the justification for installing a record from another jurisdiction into the electronic database. Finally, there is an issue with respect to the foundation that must be presented in order to admit the record into evidence in an administrative or court proceeding. The administrative hearing examiner admitted the document into evidence, and that decision was affirmed by the district court. We affirm the order of the district court affirming the order of the hearing examiner that suspended the driver's license of Douglas J. McDonald (McDonald).
McDonald did not set forth a separate statement of the issues in his brief as required by Wyo.R.App.P. 5.01, but we glean his position from the text of his brief. The essence of his claim is the admissibility of his driver's record at the administrative hearing. He contends that its admission resulted in denying him a fair hearing and due process of law because his driving privilege was suspended on the basis of a computer printout from the Department of Motor Vehicles. McDonald contends that the computer printout is not sufficient to justify the decision of the hearing officer because it lacks the required indicia of reliability; was not established to be a regularly kept "business" record; and McDonald had no avenue for testing its validity, since the hearing officer did not require foundation or authentication of the computer record. As appellee, the State of Wyoming states these to be the issues:
I. Was appellant's computer printed driver record properly admitted into evidence?
II. Does the record contain substantial evidence to support the suspension of appellant's driver's license?
McDonald was convicted of driving while under the influence in Cheyenne on November 16, 1987. On September 13, 1990, McDonald was convicted of driving while under the influence in the state of Oregon. On March 14, 1991, a notice was directed to McDonald informing him that his "Wyoming driving privilege and/or any license evidencing such privilege will be suspended * * * starting from April 12, 1991 up to and including April 10, 1992." This notice was issued pursuant to Wyo. Stat. § 31-7-128 (1989), which provides for a mandatory one-year suspension of a driver's license for a second offense of driving while under the influence within a five-year time frame. The notice informed McDonald that he had a right to a hearing before the suspension became effective, and McDonald requested a hearing within the time allowed for him to do so. The hearing was set for May 10, 1991.
After calling the hearing to order, the hearing officer briefly described the purpose of the hearing. At that point, McDonald's attorney moved "to strike from the record and from your consideration anything dealing with alleged or suspension, which is what this Court is, this Hearing Examiner is attempting to suspend on." Apparently, counsel was alluding to the driver record information, a copy of which is attached as Appendix A. The hearing examiner acknowledged the objection by counsel and continued with these statements:
At least the State has proposed the one-year suspension based on a conviction from an out-of-state court
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Wyoming DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|