Legal Opinion

Richardson v. Hiatt

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided August 15, 1989No. 887SC1096PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

COZORT, Judge.

Petitioner’s driver’s license was revoked by the respondent, Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV), for willfully refusing to submit to chemical analysis of his blood to determine its alcohol concentration. A DMV hearing officer affirmed the revocation. Petitioner filed for a hearing de novo in Superior Court under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 2046.2(e). The trial court ordered that petitioner’s driving privileges be fully restored because DMV failed to prove that a physician, registered nurse or other qualified person was available to withdraw blood at the time the charging officer requested…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. StreeterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
  2. State v. WattsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
  3. State v. BaileyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
  4. Church v. Powell, Comr. of Motor VehiclesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1979
  5. In Re AustinCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1969

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Steinkrause v. TatumCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2009
  2. Moore v. HodgesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1994
  3. State v. HinchmanCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2008
  4. State v. LindseyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2016
  5. McDowell v. TatumCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2007

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API