State, Department of Revenue & Taxation v. Hull
Wyoming Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
URBIGKIT, Justice.
A motor vehicle driver, stopped by a police officer for observed erratic driving, refused to take a blood-alcohol test. Suspension under the Wyoming implied-consent law as confirmed by an administrative hearing based on the state department implied-consent form as evidence, was reversed on appeal to the district court as insufficiently justified by the form as hearsay evidence. We reverse for reinstatement of the suspension.
Appellant, State of Wyoming, Department of Revenue and Taxation, phrases the issues as whether the district court erred in:
1. “RULING THAT THE HEARING…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- United States v. KragnessCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1987
- Charnes v. LobatoSupreme Court of Colorado · 1987
- State v. NordnessWisconsin Supreme Court · 1986
- People v. NanesSupreme Court of Colorado · 1971
- Price v. ReedSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1986
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Johnson v. State Hearing Examiner's OfficeWyoming Supreme Court · 1992
- Wyoming Department of Transportation v. HaglundWyoming Supreme Court · 1999
- Motor Vehicle Administration v. KarwackiCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1995
- Drake v. State Ex Rel. Department of Revenue & TaxationWyoming Supreme Court · 1988
- Nesius v. State Department of Revenue & Taxation, Motor Vehicle DivisionWyoming Supreme Court · 1990
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.