LeClair v. Sorel, 920 N.W.2d 306

On November 27, 2017, West Fargo police stopped Dustin LeClair for extremely bright lights, observed signs of intoxication, and obtained a positive roadside breath screen.
LeClair was arrested and, at the Cass County jail, an officer read the implied consent advisory but told LeClair that refusal “is a crime in the same manner as driving under the influence,” omitting the word "punishable" from the statutory phrasing.
The officer then administered an Intoxilyzer chemical breath test; results were used by the North Dakota Department of Transportation (the Department) to suspend LeClair’s driving privileges for two years.
LeClair challenged admissibility of the Intoxilyzer results at the administrative hearing on grounds the advisory was incomplete; the hearing officer overruled the objection.
The district court reversed the Department’s suspension; the Department appealed to the North Dakota Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court majority held the officer’s advisory was substantively complete despite omitting “punishable,” reinstating the suspension; two justices dissented, arguing the court should enforce the statutory text strictly.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether an implied-consent advisory that omits the word “punishable” satisfies N.D.C.C. § 39-20-01(3)(a) so that chemical-test results are admissible	LeClair: omission made the advisory incomplete under the statute; incomplete advisory requires exclusion of test results	Department: omission of the single word did not change substance; advisory substantially complied and conveyed required information	The Court: omission of “punishable” did not change the advisory’s substantive meaning; advisory was substantively complete and test results admissible

Filkowski v. Director, North Dakota Dep’t of Transp., 862 N.W.2d 785 (2015) (standard of review for agency factual findings and hearing officer discretion)
State v. O’Connor, 877 N.W.2d 312 (2016) (statutory advisory required; failure to convey required information bars admissibility)
State v. Bohe, 917 N.W.2d 497 (2018) (advisory insufficient when it omitted warning that refusal is a crime punishable like DUI)
Schoon v. N.D. Dep’t of Transp., 917 N.W.2d 199 (2018) (advisory must include all information required by statute for test admissibility)
State v. Salter, 758 N.W.2d 702 (2008) (prior approach assessing actual consent under Fourth Amendment before statutory changes)
Korb v. North Dakota Dep’t of Transp., 918 N.W.2d 49 (2018) (additional accurate language accompanying statutory advisory does not alter sufficiency)
State v. Smith, 849 N.W.2d 599 (2014) (context on criminalization of refusal)