Supreme Court of California

In this case, a California Highway Patrol officer stopped plaintiff's car after she was observed driving erratically, and subsequent chemical tests revealed her blood-alcohol concentration (BAC) ranged from 0.08 to 0.096 percent, above the legal limit. Plaintiff's driver's license was confiscated and she was served with a notice that her license would be suspended. In an administrative hearing to review the suspension, the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) hearing officer and the trial court discounted plaintiff's expert witness testimony as to her BAC level and instead relied on arrest reports which described the physical manifestations of plaintiff's intoxication. The trial court denied plaintiff's petition for a writ of mandate challenging the DMV hearing officer's decision suspending her license. The judgment of the Court of Appeal affirming the trial court's decision is affirmed, where the trial court did not err by considering, in addition to the results of breath and blood test, other circumstantial evidence of intoxication to conclude by a preponderance of the evidence that plaintiff drove with a BAC at or above 0.08 percent.

Appellate Information

• Decided 04/06/2015
• Published 04/06/2015

Judges

Court

• Supreme Court of California

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Werdegar