![dmv hearing office cal dmv hearing office cal](https://s3.amazonaws.com/law-media/uploads/131/20307/large/img-dmv-dui-optimized.jpg)
2 a laboratory report showing a blood-alcohol level of. The hearing officer admitted into evidence as exhibit No. This is a preprinted form that has check-off blocks and blanks for the signing officer to fill in. 1 over respondent's objections based on lack of foundation, no personal knowledge, and hearsay. The hearing officer admitted into evidence a document entitled "Officer's Statement" (also known as a form DL 367) as exhibit No. No live testimony was taken at the hearing. Respondent then sought a DMV administrative hearing to challenge the suspension of his license.
DMV HEARING OFFICE CAL LICENSE
19 percent, his driver's license was suspended. 1 Because of that arrest and a blood-alcohol test result of.
DMV HEARING OFFICE CAL CODE
On February 28, 1993, at 2:08 a.m., respondent was stopped and arrested for a violation of California Vehicle Code section 23152. We find there is no substantial evidence to support the issuing of the writ of mandate and reverse. DMV also complains that the hearing officer erroneously admitted respondent's declaration from his expert. The court further found that the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) cannot prove the defendant's driving by "double hearsay."ĭMV now appeals contending that the record is sufficient to establish that the defendant was driving a vehicle while under the influence, that he was lawfully arrested, and that his blood-alcohol level exceeded the legal maximum. Lee, actually observed the defendant driving the vehicle. The court's minute order shows the court found there was insufficient evidence of respondent's driving or that the Officer's Statement's subscribing officer, S.R. Respondent then successfully petitioned for a writ of mandate from the Riverside Superior Court on the basis the administrative record failed to establish the officer who prepared the "Officer's Statement," which was admitted into evidence, personally observed respondent's driving and had reasonable cause to believe that respondent was under the influence at the time he was driving. He challenged the suspension of his license at an administrative hearing, but the hearing officer upheld it. 08 percent and received a suspension of his license. Respondent, Michael Gray McNary, was arrested for driving with a blood-alcohol level in excess of. Kerry, Deputy Attorneys General, for Defendant and Appellant.īartell, Beloian & Hensel and Donald J. J., and Richli, J., concurring.)ĭaniel E. (Opinion by McKinster, J., with Ramirez, P.
![dmv hearing office cal dmv hearing office cal](https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-c6Tqh-vqfok/Wk44Hn-RPEI/AAAAAAAATdc/0xm8RAjBT-Q2JdrzUK3Ychb6VCOwvdVGwCK4BGAYYCw/s1600/DMV%2BHearings%2Bin%2BDUI%2Bcases%2B-%2BOrange%2BCounty%2BDUI%2BLawyers-712303.jpg)
DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, Defendant and Appellant. MICHAEL GRAY McNARY, Plaintiff and Respondent, v.