411 S.W.3d 394
Mo. Ct. App.2013Background
- DOR appeals trial court’s reinstatement of Gannon’s driving privileges after revocation under Section 302.535 RSMo.
- Gannon was stopped for speeding and failure to maintain a single lane, then arrested for driving while intoxicated and had his license revoked under Section 302.505.
- Gannon petitioned for trial de novo; the trial court reinstated driving privileges.
- The DOR argued there was probable cause to arrest; the trial court found insufficient evidence and questioned field sobriety tests.
- The trial court’s judgment lacked specific credibility findings about indicia of intoxication and uncertainty remained whether Gannon could present rebuttal evidence.
- The appellate court reversed the reinstatement and remanded for a new trial to determine credibility and allow rebuttal evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Probable cause to arrest for DWI exists? | DOR: sufficient probable cause based on observations | Gannon: trial court should determine credibility; insufficient evidence at times | Probable cause supported; remand for credibility assessment |
Key Cases Cited
- Spry v. Director of Revenue, 144 S.W.3d 362 (Mo.App. S.D. 2004) (directed verdict distinctions in court-tried cases)
- Routt v. Director of Revenue, 180 S.W.3d 521 (Mo.App. E.D. 2006) (remand for credibility determinations)
- Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30 (Mo. banc 1976) (standard of review for judgments in non-jury trials)
- Coyle v. Director of Revenue, 88 S.W.3d 887 (Mo.App. W.D. 2002) (probable cause framework for DWI arrests)
- Findley v. Director of Revenue, 204 S.W.3d 722 (Mo.App. S.D. 2006) (probable cause may rely on observations beyond field sobriety tests)
- Brown v. Director of Revenue, 85 S.W.3d 1 (Mo. banc 2002) (conduct and indicia of intoxication support probable cause)
- Arch v. Director of Revenue, 186 S.W.3d 477 (Mo.App. E.D. 2006) (HGN and sobriety tests supplement probable cause)