DRUNK DRIVING;

You asked if police officers called to testify at Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) administrative license suspension hearings for per se violations of driving with an elevated blood-alcohol level can have legal counsel and, if not, why not. You also wanted to know the requirements in New York, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts for similar proceedings. Finally, you wanted to know the percentage of cases DMV hears that result in imposition of the license suspension.

SUMMARY

Under the rules that apply to DMV administrative license suspension hearings for per se violations of the drunk driving law, police officers who testify at hearings are not considered parties to the case and may have legal counsel only if they petition for and are granted “intervenor status” under the Uniform Administrative Procedure Act (UAPA) provisions that apply to contested cases. None of the three surrounding states have proceedings comparable to Connecticut’s administrative suspension process.

In 2001, approximately 81% of the cases referred to DMV for processing under the per se law requirements resulted in imposition of the license suspension.

ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING PROCESS

According to Thomas Ruby, chief of DMV’s Driver Services Division, it conducts its license suspension hearings pursuant to the requirements of the UAPA for contested cases (CGS § 4-177 et seq. ). By law, any driver may be requested by a police officer to submit to a blood-alcohol test if the officer has placed the driver under arrest for driving while under the influence of alcohol or drugs, advised him of his constitutional rights, and followed certain other statutory requirements (GCS § 14-227b). If the driver refuses to submit to the test, or he takes the test and the results show an “elevated blood-alcohol content” (. 08% or more for drivers age 21 and over or . 02% or more for drivers under age 21), his license is subject to an immediate administrative suspension that occurs independently of any consequences associated with adjudication of the criminal charges. The person may request a hearing, which must be provided before the effective date of the suspension, at which he may contest the suspension on certain limited grounds specified in the law.

Under the UAPA standards DMV follows for these administrative hearings, a police officer testifying at the hearing is not considered to be a party to the case, which would afford him the opportunity to be represented by counsel if he chose to have one. However, the officer can petition to be granted “intervenor status. ” If granted intervenor status, the officer could have legal representation (presumably provided by his department). A petition for intervenor status must state facts showing that participation is in the interests of justice and will not impair the orderly conduct of the proceedings (CGS § 4-177a).

There are no comparable administrative proceedings in any of the three states surrounding Connecticut. The impaired driving laws of New York and Rhode Island do not authorize any pre-conviction administrative license sanction. In Massachusetts, the motor vehicle agency hears only requests for review of a suspension resulting from a test refusal. An unfavorable agency ruling may be appealed to the judicial district in which the offense occurred. A person whose test result indicated an illegal blood-alcohol level must request a hearing on the resulting pre-conviction license suspension before the court in which the underlying charges are pending.

FINAL CASE DISPOSITIONS

In 2001, the Driver Services Division received 13,825 per se arrest reports from police agencies of which 12,017 were entered into the system for processing. Of these, the automatic suspension was affirmed without a hearing being held in 6,190 cases. DMV held hearings in 5,049 cases and in 3,532 of these instances, the driver lost the hearing and the suspension was upheld. Thus, out of the 12,017 reports received and acted upon by DMV, a total of 9,722 (80. 9%) resulted in the driver being suspended either without a hearing being held or after losing the hearing.

JJF: eh