Helsten v. Schwendiman
Utah Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
STEWART, Justice:
In these consolidated cases, appellants are drivers whose licenses were revoked by the Department of Public Safety pursuant to *510Utah’s implied consent statute, U.C.A., 1958, § 41-6-44.10. A district court upheld the revocations. Appellants contend that the revocation procedure was invalid because the arresting police officer failed to submit a “sworn report,” as required by § 41-6-44.10(b).
Section 41-6-44.10 authorizes the Department of Public Safety to revoke the license of a driver who refuses to submit to a chemical test for the purpose of determining whether that person…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Wilcox v. BillingsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1968
- Beck v. CoxUtah Supreme Court · 1979
- Blackburn v. MOTOR VEHICLES DIVISION, DEPT.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1978
- Cavaness v. CoxUtah Supreme Court · 1979
- Dawson v. Secretary of StateMichigan Court of Appeals · 1973
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Mickelsen v. Craigco, Inc.Utah Supreme Court · 1989
- Colman v. SchwendimanUtah Supreme Court · 1984
- Stephens v. State, Transportation DepartmentNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1987
- Baker v. SchwendimanUtah Supreme Court · 1986
- Moore v. SchwendimanCourt of Appeals of Utah · 1988
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.