Baker

Baker v. Gourley

Good Law
120 Cal. Rptr. 2d 348·2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 4194·2002 Daily Journal DAR 6119·98 Cal. App. 4th 1263·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4819
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 31, 2002G028732California4,456 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sills, J.

This case centers on the so-called “Admin Per Se” laws where the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) suspends a driver’s license when a motorist has been arrested for drunk driving before the motorist has had the benefit of a trial in a court of law. It does not involve a criminal prosecution for drunk driving. As we explain below, because the Admin Per Se law operates in a summary fashion, the DMV is required to show that the motorist had a certain amount of blood alcohol (.08 percent) at the time he or she was driving. And that requires a valid chemical test.

Of course, a jury in a court of law could certainly conclude in a criminal prosecution that a driver was intoxicated based on such indicia as slurred speech and an unsteady gait without a valid chemical test. And trial judges, even in a case of a first offense, have always had the power to suspend a driver’s license as a condition of probation (see Veh. Code, § 13352). But before the DMV can summarily suspend a license without court proceedings it must have the definite evidence of a valid chemical test showing blood alcohol while driving of at least .08 percent. As the DMV itself is well aware, some symptoms of…

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.