 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Vigil v. Motor Vehicle Division of Department of Revenue2/11/1974
at "if reasonable grounds [to believe that the defendant was driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of, or impaired by, alcohol] are established and said person is unable to submit evidence" on certain specified
issues, then "the department shall forthwith revoke said person's license to operate a motor vehicle."
We hold that this statutory language does not shift the burden of proof to the licensee on the specified issues. The statute creates a presumption which shifts the burden of producing evidence to the licensee on those presumed facts. The licensee is required to submit sufficient evidence which taken by itself could support the licensee's position. Once the licensee has produced that degree of evidence, it becomes incumbent in this type of proceeding for the motor vehicle division to present evidence to sustain its burden of proof. See McCormick on Evidence § 345 (2nd Ed. 1972). The statutory presumption avoids the needless presentation of evidence by the department of revenue on issues on which there is no serious dispute.
Disposition
Affirmed.
MR. JUSTICE GROVES dissenting:
I respectfully dissent.
The defendant was advised that, upon refusal to take the test, there would be a hearing at which he might show cause why his license should not be revoked. From this he could logically conclude that he could show cause with situations such as dismissal or acquittal of the driving under the influence charge. To assure due process the advisement should show the extremely limited area in which cause may be shown.
|