Legal Opinion

Motor Vehicle Administration v. Aiken

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided January 25, 2011No. 69, September Term, 2009PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarbera, J.

We are called upon in this case to construe, once again, the provisions of Maryland Code (2009 RepLVol.), § 16-205.1 of the Transportation Article (“TR”), Maryland’s so-called “implied consent, administrative per se law” (hereinafter, the “Statute”). 1 The Statute provides for automatic suspension of a driver’s license to drive if, inter alia, a test of the driver’s blood alcohol concentration produces a “result indicating an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more at the time of testing[.]” TR § 16-205.1(b)(l)(i)(l.). The Statute entitles a driver to challenge the order of suspension at a…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Motor Vehicle Administration v. ShepardCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2007
  2. Motor Vehicle Administration v. LytleCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2003
  3. Motor Vehicle Administration v. RichardsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1999
  4. Motor Vehicle Administration v. SheaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2010
  5. Motor Vehicle Administration v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2004

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Cosby v. Department of Human ResourcesCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2012
  2. Motor Vehicle Administration v. KrafftCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2017
  3. Motor Vehicle Administration v. LoaneCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2011
  4. Motor Vehicle Administration v. SpiesCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2013
  5. Com. v. Rozell, M.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2019

4 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