Jarmer v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue, 546 P.3d 743

Shana L. Jarmer’s vehicle was stuck in a muddy ditch after her husband had driven it into a house, and both were trying to move it out; Jarmer was in the driver’s seat, engine running, pressing the gas, but the vehicle did not move.
Jarmer failed a breath alcohol test with a 0.156 reading (legal limit 0.08) and was arrested for driving under the influence (DUI).
The Kansas Department of Revenue (KDR) suspended her driver’s license based on operation of a vehicle while intoxicated, under K.S.A. 8-1002(a)(2).
Jarmer argued that, since the vehicle did not move, she only attempted to operate the vehicle, which is not covered under K.S.A. 8-1002(a)(2) for license suspension after a failed test.
The district court and Court of Appeals upheld the suspension, holding she "operated" the vehicle, but the Kansas Supreme Court granted review.

Issue	Jarmer’s Argument	KDR’s Argument	Held
Does "operate" under K.S.A. 8-1002(a)(2) require actual movement of a vehicle for license suspension after a failed breath test?	"Operate" means "drive," which under precedent and statute requires movement; since her vehicle did not move, she did not "operate" it, only attempted to.	Jarmer had physical control with the engine on, tires spinning—this satisfies "operation," regardless of actual movement.	"Operate" means to drive and requires movement; since the vehicle did not move, only an attempt to operate occurred—not "operation"—so suspension was improper.

State v. Darrow, 304 Kan. 710 (Kan. 2016) (operation of a vehicle requires movement; taking control without movement is only attempt)
State v. Kendall, 274 Kan. 1003 (Kan. 2002) (synonymy of "drive" and "operate"; movement distinguishes operation from attempt)
State v. Fish, 228 Kan. 204 (Kan. 1980) (operation/drive requires movement; conviction needs some evidence of vehicle movement)
State v. Zeiner, 316 Kan. 346 (Kan. 2022) (post-parking actions do not constitute operation, as operation requires intent to move vehicle)