Miller v. Wyoming Department of Health
275 P.3d 1257
Wyo.2012Background
- Miller and Gonzalez were separately cited/arrested for DWUI in Wyoming and sought judicial review of the WDOH's inaction to decertify testing officers.
- They requested retroactive decertification of the officers who conducted their breath tests under W.S. § 31-6-105 and WDOH rules; WDOH did not respond to their April 5, 2011 letter.
- Miller and Gonzalez filed a Petition for Judicial Review with the district court on April 22, 2011.
- The Department moved to dismiss on standing and ripeness grounds; the district court granted the motion on July 7, 2011.
- Miller and Gonzalez appealed; the Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed the district court’s dismissal.
- The court ultimately held lack of standing, and did not address ripeness because standing was dispositive.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the petition ripe for review? | Miller | Department | Ripeness not reached; standing dispositive. |
| Do Miller and Gonzalez have standing to compel decertification? | Miller and Gonzalez have a stake in license status | They lack a legally protectable interest; injury speculative | They lack standing; district court affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992) (three elements of Article III standing (injury, causation, redressability))
- Roe v. Board of County Commissioners, Campbell County, 997 P.2d 1021 (Wy. 2000) (standing limits; aggrieved party must have concrete injury)
- Jolley v. State Loan & Inv. Bd., 38 P.3d 1073 (Wy. 2002) (standing and justiciability in Wyoming cases)
- Foster's, Inc. v. City of Laramie, 718 P.2d 868 (Wy. 1986) (injury must be perceptible, not speculative, for standing)
- Herrig v. Herrig, 844 P.2d 487 (Wy. 1992) (standards for testing legal sufficiency on review of 12(b)(6) dismissal)
- Escarcega v. State ex rel. Wyo. DOT, 153 P.3d 264 (Wy. 2007) (standard of review for agency action)