Motor Vehicle Administration v. Krafft
158 A.3d 539
| Md. | 2017Background
- Maryland's implied consent, administrative per se statute (TR §16-205.1) authorizes an officer who reasonably believes a person drove or attempted to drive while impaired to request a breath (or chemical) test; refusal triggers an administrative license suspension.
- A detained motorist receives DR-15 (Advice of Rights) and the officer completes DR-15A (Officer’s Certification and Order of Suspension); the motorist may request an adjudicative hearing before an OAH ALJ.
- At such hearings the statute lists the issues the ALJ may decide in a test-refusal case: (1) whether the officer had reasonable grounds to believe the person was driving/attempting to drive while impaired; (2) whether there was evidence of alcohol use; (3) whether the officer advised the person per statute; and (4) whether the person refused the test.
- In Styslinger: officer found licensee asleep in driver’s seat with engine running, smelled alcohol, licensee failed FSTs and refused the test; ALJ found officer had reasonable grounds but nevertheless took "no action" because ALJ concluded MVA failed to prove Styslinger actually drove or attempted to drive.
- In Krafft: trooper found licensee passed out inside home after a reported vehicle accident; licensee refused test; ALJ concluded MVA had not proved the licensee had driven and entered inconsistent/unclear findings regarding "reasonable grounds," then took no action.
- MVA appealed both OAH decisions arguing the ALJs applied the wrong legal standard by requiring proof of actual driving rather than proof the officer had reasonable grounds to believe driving occurred.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (MVA) | Defendant's Argument (Licensee) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether MVA must prove actual driving/attempted driving at suspension hearing | MVA: No — statute requires proof only that officer had reasonable grounds to believe the licensee drove/attempted to drive while impaired | Licensees: ALJs and courts below argued suspension should be upheld only if actual driving/attempted driving is proved | Court: MVA need only prove officer had reasonable grounds to believe driving/attempted driving occurred (statutory list controls) |
| Standard of proof for predicate (officer belief) | MVA: Preponderance that officer had reasonable grounds (reasonable articulable suspicion) | Licensees: Argued ALJ should require more (actual driving by preponderance) | Court: MVA must persuade ALJ by a preponderance that the officer had reasonable grounds — that is a lower, objective reasonableness test than proving actual driving |
| Application to Styslinger (facts: asleep in driver seat, engine running, odor, failed FSTs, refusal) | MVA: Officer’s observations provided reasonable grounds; suspension should be upheld | Styslinger: Denied he attempted to drive; argued evidence insufficient without live officer testimony | Held: ALJ had found reasonable grounds; that finding sufficed — reversal of ALJ and suspension upheld (remanded for MVA action consistent with opinion) |
| Application to Krafft (facts: vehicle registered to him, found passed out at home, intoxicated, refused test) | MVA: DR-15A and facts supported reasonable grounds to suspect driving while impaired | Krafft: Argued MVA did not show reasonable grounds that he drove while impaired | Held: ALJ’s findings on reasonable grounds were ambiguous/inconsistent; case reversed and remanded for clarification of findings |
Key Cases Cited
- Missouri v. McNeely, 133 S. Ct. 1552 (U.S. 2013) (context on states’ implied consent regimes)
- Motor Vehicle Administration v. Deering, 438 Md. 611 (Md. 2014) (statutory purpose: remove impaired drivers; sanctions encourage testing)
- Motor Vehicle Administration v. McDorman, 364 Md. 253 (Md. 2001) (issues properly adjudicated at suspension hearings)
- Motor Vehicle Administration v. Carpenter, 424 Md. 401 (Md. 2012) (reasonable inference of driving from circumstances at accident scene)
- Motor Vehicle Administration v. Shea, 415 Md. 1 (Md. 2010) (standard of review and discussion of reasonable-grounds standard)
- Motor Vehicle Administration v. Dove, 413 Md. 70 (Md. 2010) (reasonable-grounds vs. higher burdens explained)
- Motor Vehicle Administration v. Loane, 420 Md. 211 (Md. 2011) (interpretation of scope of implied consent language)
- Atkinson v. State, 331 Md. 199 (Md. 1993) (criminal-DUI discussion on control of vehicle while asleep)
- Motor Vehicle Administration v. Atterbeary, 368 Md. 480 (Md. 2002) (distinguishing facts where motorist was in physical control with engine running)
- United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 (U.S. 2002) (totality-of-circumstances approach to reasonable suspicion)