194 Cal. App. 4th 1240
Cal. Ct. App.2011Background
- Petrus was arrested for driving under the influence after a nighttime incident observed by off-duty CHP and deputy sheriff.
- Blood test results showing 0.18% BAC were faxed to Petrus’ counsel on the morning of the DMV hearing.
- Hearing officer admitted the blood test report over Petrus’ discovery objection without a continuance.
- Petrus requested a continuance to review the blood test results; the request was denied for lack of an offer of proof.
- Trial court denied Petrus’ petition for writ of mandate; the DMV suspended his driving privileges again.
- Court reversed, finding Petrus deprived of due process due to the failure to permit a meaningful opportunity to present his case.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Due process denial from denial of continuance | Petrus, via Petrus, lacked time to review results. | DMV provided pre-hearing access; no offer of proof shown. | Petition granted; due process violated |
Key Cases Cited
- Lake v. Reed, 16 Cal.4th 448 (Cal. 1997) (weight of evidence review in mandamus appeals)
- Bickel v. City of Piedmont, 16 Cal.4th 1040 (Cal. 1997) (standard for resolving conflicting evidence)
- Mohilef v. Janovici, 51 Cal.App.4th 267 (Cal. App. 1996) (due process requires meaningful opportunity to present case)
- Brown v. Valverde, 183 Cal.App.4th 1531 (Cal. App. 2010) (DMV must prove driving, arrest, and BAC 0.08% or higher; discovery limits apply)
- Glatman v. Valverde, 146 Cal.App.4th 700 (Cal. App. 2006) (forensic report timing affects credibility and due process)
- Davenport v. Department of Motor Vehicles, 6 Cal.App.4th 133 (Cal. App. 1992) (no requirement to marshal complex scientific evidence to avoid suspension)