Morrow v. Ziegler
826 N.W.2d 912
| N.D. | 2013Background
- In February 2012, a Highway Patrol officer observed Morrow speeding 81 mph in a 65 mph zone and noted glossy, bloodshot eyes and the odor of alcohol.
- Morrow admitted drinking a beer with dinner and underwent field sobriety tests, failing two and passing two.
- Morrow refused the SD-5 onsite screening test after being read the implied consent advisory.
- The Report and Notice form showed the officer checked Refused onsite screening test, listed the traffic violation as the stop reason, and marked N/A for probable cause to arrest, with no explicit statement that the body contained alcohol.
- Morrow challenged the suspension at an administrative hearing; the hearing officer suspended privileges for one year, the district court affirmed, and the Supreme Court reversed.
- The case centers on whether the report must explicitly show the officer believed the driver’s body contained alcohol in order for the Department to suspend driving privileges; the concurrence discusses proper form usage.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the report must state belief that the body contained alcohol? | Morrow: required to list belief. | Department: belief may be inferred from actions. | Report must reflect belief; inference is insufficient. |
| Does failure to indicate belief deprive authority to suspend for refusal? | Morrow: failure removes basis to suspend. | Department: can proceed with stated grounds. | Yes, lack of explicit belief renders suspension unauthorized. |
| Can the form be interpreted to imply belief without explicit notation? | Cannot rely on implication; needs explicit notation. | Implied belief permissible via form context. | Implied belief is not adequate; explicit notation required. |
Key Cases Cited
- Aamodt v. N.D. Dep’t of Transp., 2004 ND 134 (ND 2004) (mandatory grounds for suspension are essential to agency authority)
- Jorgensen v. N.D. Dep’t of Transp., 2005 ND 80 (ND 2005) (failure to record BAC results can render report deficient)
- Lange v. N.D. Dep’t of Tramp., 2010 ND 201 (ND 2010) (agency findings reviewed for soundness of district court)