Foster

Foster v. Snyder

Good Law
1999 Cal. App. LEXIS 998·76 Cal. App. 4th 264·90 Cal. Rptr. 2d 207·99 Daily Journal DAR 11563·99 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9080
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 16, 1999No. E023610California2,977 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Gaut, J.

*266 Opinion

1. Introduction

The Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) appeals the Riverside County Superior Court’s judgment granting a petition for writ of administrative mandate in favor of plaintiff, David L. Foster, Jr. The judgment prohibited the DMV from suspending the driver’s license of plaintiff, who was under the age of 21 with a blood-alcohol concentration (BAC) in excess of 0.01 percent when he drove an automobile. On appeal, the DMV first contends the trial court erroneously found the defense of duress applicable to an administrative per se 1 proceeding. Second, the DMV contends that, even if the defense applies in this noncriminal context, the trial court erred in finding the evidence sufficient to support all the elements of duress.

In concluding that duress defense does not apply in the administrative per se proceeding conducted to review the suspension of plaintiffs driver’s license, we reverse the trial court’s grant of plaintiff’s petition for writ of administrative mandate. In so holding, we need not address the DMV’s second contention.

2. Factual and Procedural History

On October 4, 1997, Sergeant Knoteck observed plaintiff driving at excessive speeds (Veh.…

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.