Padilla

Padilla v. Meese

Good Law
184 Cal. App. 3d 1022·1986 Cal. App. LEXIS 1959·229 Cal. Rptr. 310
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 25, 1986Civ. 24925California4,380 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sparks, J.

In this case we first consider whether, for purposes of a misdemeanor arrest for drunk driving, a vehicle must be moved in the presence of the arresting officer in order for the offense to occur in his presence. We hold that the vehicle must be moved. We next consider whether the preventative actions taken by a state inspector at an agricultural inspection station against a drunk driver constituted a lawful citizen’s arrest. We hold that the inspector’s actions constituted a valid arrest even though he was confused about the technical requirements of a citizen’s arrest.

After an administrative hearing the Department of Motor Vehicles rendered a decision suspending the driving privilege of appellant Gerald James Padilla pursuant to the implied consent law. (Veh. Code, § 13353.) The suspension followed appellant’s refusal to submit to a chemical test to determine his blood alcohol level after an arrest for driving while under the influence of alcohol. (Veh. Code, § 23152.) Plaintiff unsuccessfully sought a writ of administrative mandate in the Superior Court of El Dorado County. He appeals from a judgment denying his petition contending that the department erred in denying…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.