 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Zaba v. Motor Vehicle Division12/10/1973
y in November 1971 at which time it was advised that Zaba's drunk driving conviction had been affirmed. Thereupon, the Motor Vehicle Division promptly scheduled Zaba's suspension hearing.
Although the time lapse between the original scheduling of the suspension hearing and the actual hearing involved a period of over two years, the delay was initiated at the behest of and for the convenience of Zaba. The record reveals that the Motor Vehicle Division diligently made inquiry regarding the appeal and acted promptly after being notified of the disposition of Zaba's appeal. Under these circumstances, we hold that there is not such an unreasonable delay as would warrant the reversal of the suspension order against Zaba by the Motor Vehicle Division.
IV.
Appellant Work maintains that the order of the Motor Vehicle Division was in fact an order of denial rather than an order of suspension. Therefore, he maintains that since the notice he received from the Motor Vehicle Division informed him that the scheduled hearing related to "suspension," its order denying him of the right to obtain a driver's license for a period of one year was invalid and should be reversed.
The record reveals that the hearing examiner for the Motor Vehicle Division found that Work had more than 18 points in the 24-month period. However, at the hearing, it was found that Work had not renewed his driver's license and that it had expired. Therefore, at the time of the hearing he, in fact, had no driver's license and accordingly, rather than order a non-existing license to be suspended for a period of one year, the hearing examiner ordered that he should not be granted a license for one year.
Appellant Work's contention, in our view, not only lacks merit but statutorily, the hearing examiner was authorized under these facts to enter an order of denial rather than an order of suspension. 1965 Perm. Supp., C.R.S. 1963, 13-4-3(3)(d) specifically provides for the denial of a driver's license as a supplement to suspension. In our view, this
statutory provision was designed to take care of a situation similar to that involved here.
Judgments affirmed.
Disposition
Affirmed.
|