Murphey v. Shiomoto
D069557
| Cal. Ct. App. | Jul 28, 2017Background
- Matthew Murphey was arrested for DUI (Veh. Code § 23152, subd. (a)); CHP Officer Oka completed a sworn DS-367 and an unsworn arrest report showing observation of driving at 2:50 a.m., blood draw at 3:57 a.m., booking at 3:55 a.m., and a lab BAC of .16.
- The DMV hearing officer admitted the reports over Murphey's hearsay objections, found the statutory elements satisfied, and upheld the administrative suspension under the administrative per se law (Veh. Code § 13353.2 et seq.).
- Murphey petitioned the superior court for writ of administrative mandate, arguing the reports contained "physical impossibilities" (booking at 3:55 and blood draw at 3:57 at different locations), rendering them unreliable and insufficient to sustain the suspension; he sought fees claiming arbitrary/capricious conduct.
- The superior court granted the writ and attorney fees, finding the administrative decision unsupported by the record; the DMV (Director Shiomoto) appealed.
- The Court of Appeal reversed: it held the reports were admissible under the public employee records exception and the evidence (including the .16 BAC) supported the suspension; it also reversed the fee award as Murphey was no longer prevailing party.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of officer's sworn DS-367 and unsworn arrest report | Reports contain timing "physical impossibilities" making them untrustworthy and inadmissible under Evidence Code §1280 and Gov. Code §11513 | Reports are public employee records, made near event by officer based on firsthand observations; thus admissible under Evid. Code §1280 and relaxed admin standards | Reports were admissible; trial court abused discretion in excluding them because any timing inaccuracies did not rebut trustworthiness or affect the three-hour presumption window |
| Whether evidence established statutory elements for suspension (reasonable cause, lawful arrest, BAC ≥ .08 within 3 hours) | Timing errors undermine Department's proof that blood draw occurred within 3 hours of driving, defeating statutory presumption and sufficiency | Sworn/unsworn reports plus lab result (.16) permit reasonable inference blood draw was within 3 hours; licensee presented no contradictory evidence | Substantial evidence supports hearing officer's decision; weight of evidence upheld suspension and trial court erred in granting writ |
| Standard of review for evidentiary ruling in writ action | N/A (argued indirectly by reliance on trial court review) | Abuse of discretion for evidentiary rulings; independent judgment/substantial evidence for weight-of-evidence review | Abuse of discretion applied to evidentiary ruling; independent judgment/substantial-evidence review applied to weight-of-evidence claim; both favor DMV |
| Award of attorney fees and costs under Gov. Code §800 | DMV acted arbitrarily/capriciously; prevailing party entitled to fees | No arbitrary/capricious conduct shown; DMV prevailed on appeal | Fee award reversed because superior court's writ grant was reversed and Murphey is no longer prevailing party |
Key Cases Cited
- Coffey v. Shiomoto, 60 Cal.4th 1198 (summarizes administrative per se framework and elements for suspension)
- Jackson v. Department of Motor Vehicles, 22 Cal.App.4th 730 (applies rebuttable presumption of §23152(b) in administrative per se proceedings)
- MacDonald v. Gutierrez, 32 Cal.4th 150 (unsworn arrest reports may supplement sworn reports in DMV hearings)
- Gananian v. Zolin, 33 Cal.App.4th 634 (police reports based on officers' duty satisfy trustworthiness for Evid. Code §1280)
- Santos v. Department of Motor Vehicles, 5 Cal.App.4th 537 (presumption that official duty performed shifts foundational burden; absence of time evidence can defeat DMV if no inference supports three-hour window)
- Burge v. Department of Motor Vehicles, 5 Cal.App.4th 384 (substantial-evidence review upheld suspension where record supported inference test was within three hours)
- McKinney v. Department of Motor Vehicles, 5 Cal.App.4th 519 (hearing officer may infer timing from surrounding facts; trial court erred reversing suspension for lack of explicit driving time)
- Manning v. Department of Motor Vehicles, 61 Cal.App.4th 273 (patent impossibility or indicia of swapped test results can render forensic report unreliable and inadmissible)
- Morgenstern v. Department of Motor Vehicles, 111 Cal.App.4th 366 (independent judgment standard for superior court review of DMV suspensions)
- Miyamoto v. Department of Motor Vehicles, 176 Cal.App.4th 1210 (abuse of discretion standard for trial court evidentiary rulings in DMV writ proceedings)