State6/15/2005
In these consolidated petitions for writ of certiorari, we are faced with a constitutional question of whether the use of non-lawyers as hearing officers, in formal hearings pursuant to section 322.2615(6), Florida Statutes, violates the due process rights of motorists arrested for driving under the influence (DUI). Before we answer the constitutional question, it is important to understand the procedural history of the four cases now before us.
In each case, a law enforcement officer suspected a motorist of DUI and made an arrest. Pursuant to section 322.2615(1)(a), Florida Statutes, these motorists had their driver's licenses automatically suspended. Each motorist sought formal review before a hearing officer, pursuant to section 322.2615(6), Florida Statutes. The suspensions were upheld in all four cases. On certiorari review to the circuit courts, acting in their appellate capacity, three suspensions were upheld, amidst various challenges, including the instant claim of a constitutional infirmity. In one case, a circuit judge declared, inter alia, that the procedure of using non-lawyers as hearing officers for proceedings under section 322.2615, Florida Statutes, violated due process. The Department sought second-tier certiorari review from this ruling and the other motorists sought second-tier certiorari review of their cases, suggesting a conflict in the circuit courts.
By order, this court consolidated these cases for the sole purpose of resolving the conflict; to wit, determining whether the use of non-lawyers under section 322.2615, Florida Statutes, is unconstitutional. After hearing arguments and reviewing the applicable case law, as to this particular issue, we hereby grant the Department's petition for writ of certiorari in the Griffin case, deny the petitions of the motorists in the related, consolidated cases, and declare that the use of non-lawyers as hearing officers does not violate our State or Federal Constitutions and does not violate due process.
The statutory scheme of section 322.2615(6), Florida Statutes, allows for a motorist to request a formal hearing if the Department suspends the driving privileges after an arrest for a violation of 316.193, Florida Statutes. § 322.2615(1)(a), (6)(a), Fla. Stat. (2004). The Legislature requires a "formal review hearing shall be held before a hearing officer employed by the department," but does not require the hearing officer to be a member of The Florida Bar. § 366.2615(6)(b), Fla. Stat. (2004). Pursuant to section 120.80(8)(a), Florida Statutes, "hearings regarding drivers' licensing pursuant to chapter 322 need not be conducted by an administrative law judge assigned by the division." § 120.80(a)(a)1., Fla. Stat. (2004).
As this is a pure question of law, our review of the circuit court rulings is de novo. See Armstrong v. Harris, 773 So.2d 7, 11 (Fla. 2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 958 (2001). Yet while our review is conducted de novo, we are mindful of the basic tenet of statutory review that " here is a strong presumption that a statute is constitutionally valid." Brazil v. State, 845 So.2d 282, 287 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003), rev. denied, 876 So.2d 561 (Fla. 2004), (citing City of Miami v. McGrath, 824 So.2d 143, 146 (Fla. 2002)). As applied to the instant case, we must give a strong presumption that the statutory scheme is constitutionally valid and we review the holdings of the circuit courts de novo in light of this strong presumption.
While our State Constitution generally requires judges in the circuit and county courts to be members of The Florida Bar, it specifically allows for general law to waive such a requirement. Art. V, § 8, Fla. Const. Additionally, the 1972 amendments specific
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Florida DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|