May v. Sprynczynatyk
v.
David A. Sprynczynatyk, Director,
Department of Transportation, Respondent and Appellee
Judge Wade L. Webb
| Appellant: | Vogel Law Firm | |
| Appellee: | Douglas Bruce Anderson , Att. General Office |
Listen to recording of oral argument
using RealPlayer Basic,© a free download.
I. Noncompliance with statute requires summary reversal.
II. The chemical test evidence was improperly considered.
A. The hearing officer made factual findings not supported by the testimony or record.
B. Irregularity in the test record required expert testimony.
C. Compliance with state toxicology procedures was not shown.
III. The Department impermissibly shifted the burden of persuasion and proof to the Appellant.
Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
1. Whether May failed to establish that a systematic disregard of the law exists in the filing of transcripts of testimony by the Department so as to warrant a sanction in the form of the reversal of the suspension of his driving privileges.
2. Whether the law enforcement officer's testimony supported a finding that a clerical error on the Intoxilyzer Test Record and Checklist could not have affected the reliability or accuracy of May's Intoxilyzer test, such that the hearing officer reasonably concluded the chemical test for intoxication was fairly administered.
3. Whether the law enforcement record describing the changing and usage of the standard solution used in May's Intoxilyzer breath-test analysis was properly admitted into evidence, such that the hearing officer reasonably concluded the chemical test for intoxication was fairly administered.
4. Whether the Department did not shift the burden of proof and persuasion regarding the administration of the chemical test for intoxication to May.
Add Docket 20040232 RSS