Clinton v. the State
340 Ga. App. 587
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- On Feb. 24, 2014, Clinton was stopped for a window-tint violation and charged with window tint, driving without registration, driving without insurance, and felony "habitual impaired driving."
- At a bench trial Clinton stipulated to guilt on the tint, registration, and insurance counts and stipulated to the facts of three prior DUI convictions (Feb. 18, 2011; Mar. 8, 2012; Sept. 15, 2012).
- On Sept. 17, 2012, Clinton signed an "official notice of revocation/suspension" advising of revocation/suspension upon conviction for offenses including DUI, but the form did not state he was being declared a "habitual violator." He pled guilty the same day to three DUI charges.
- The State conceded the Department of Driver Services had not given the statutorily required notice that Clinton was a "habitual violator"; Clinton produced a May 2014 letter confirming no such notice had been sent.
- The trial court convicted Clinton of felony habitual impaired driving under OCGA § 40-5-58(c)(2). On appeal the Court of Appeals reviewed de novo and reversed for insufficient proof of the statutorily required notice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the State proved Clinton received statutory notice of habitual violator status required by OCGA § 40-5-58(b) | Clinton: No adequate notice was given; statute requires certified mail/overnight with return receipt or personal service before a conviction for habitual violator offenses | State: Clinton acknowledged license suspension and Department attempted notification in Oct. 2012, so statutory notice requirement was satisfied or otherwise met | Reversed — conviction vacated. The statute requires the Department to "notify" a person of habitual violator status; the State failed to show the statutorily required notice was provided |
Key Cases Cited
- Greene County Bd. of Commissioners v. Higdon, 277 Ga. App. 350 (discussing de novo review where bench-trial facts are undisputed)
- Deal v. Coleman, 294 Ga. 170 (statutory interpretation: give text its plain and ordinary meaning)
- Munna v. State, 331 Ga. App. 410 (essence of habitual violator offense is driving after being notified one may not do so)
- Smith v. State, 248 Ga. 828 (offense of driving after revocation upon being declared habitual violator is distinct from underlying offenses)