Legal Opinion
Petrus v. Department of Motor Vehicles
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 7, 2011No. D057523PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
McDONALD, J.
Edmond Petrus appeals the trial court’s denial of his petition for writ of mandate seeking to set aside the suspension by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) of his driving privileges. Petrus contends (1) he was deprived of due process because the DMV’s administrative hearing officer denied his request for a continuance; (2) the DMV’s administrative hearing officer erred by admitting hearsay evidence; and (3) there was no evidence to show Petrus’s blood test was timely taken. We conclude Petrus was deprived of due process and reverse.1
FACTS
About 10:35 p.m. on September…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Lake v. ReedCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
- Bickel v. City of PiedmontCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
- Davenport v. Department of Motor VehiclesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
- Mohilef v. JanoviciCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996
- Brown v. ValverdeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Cal. Dui Lawyers Ass'n v. Cal. Dep't of Motor Vehicles, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- CA DUI Lawyers Assn v. CA DMVCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2018
- California DUI Lawyers Assn. v. Cal. Dept. of Motor VehiclesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2022
- Cisneros v. Dept. of Motor VehiclesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2024
- Cisneros v. Dept. of Motor VehiclesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2024
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.