Pierce

Murphy v. Pierce

Good Law
1 Cal. App. 4th 690·1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 1407·2 Cal. Rptr. 2d 18·91 Daily Journal DAR 15102
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 22, 1991H008510California1,966 words

Opinion

Opinion

Bamattre-Manoukian, J.

Patrick Duane Murphy (driver) claims it is unconstitutionally unfair that he faces a four-month suspension of his driver’s license by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) for his first drunk driving offense when he would face only a one-month suspension followed by a five-month restriction if he had a commercial driver’s license. The superior court agreed, finding this legislative distinction a denial of equal protection because it lacks a rational basis. The court ordered A. A. Pierce, as Director of the DMV, to either reinstate driver’s driving privilege or hold a hearing considering imposition of a restriction. DMV appeals from the judgment granting driver’s petition for writ of mandate. We granted the California Teamsters Public Affairs Council (Teamsters) leave to file an amicus curiae brief supporting the DMV. For the reasons stated below, we will reverse the judgment.

Driver is a captain for the Cathedral City Fire Department. One of the conditions of his employment is a valid California driver’s license. His license is not a commercial one. On December 11, 1990, he was stopped for weaving at 11:34 p.m. He smelled of alcohol, his speech was slurred, his gait was…

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.