Sloop v. Kansas Department of Revenue
290 P.3d 555
| Kan. | 2012Background
- Sloop appeals a KDOR driving-privileges suspension for 1 year under K.S.A. 2008 Supp. 8-1014(a)(1) after refusing an breath test.
- Officer Bergerhofer stopped Sloop for an out-of-function tag light and observed odor of alcohol and signs suggesting intoxication.
- Pre-arrest observations included odor of alcohol, eyes, admission of one beer; postarrest field sobriety results were inconclusive and later deemed improperly administered.
- Sloop was arrested and transported to the station where sobriety tests were performed and he refused the evidentiary breath test.
- KDOR suspended Sloop’s license solely due to the breath-test refusal, relying on the arrest and the implied-consent framework.
- The Court reverses, finds the arrest unlawful for lack of probable cause, holds no statutory authority to request the breath test, and reinstates Sloop’s driving privileges.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the breath-test request authorized by law based on a lawful arrest? | Sloop argues the arrest lacked probable cause. | KDOR/Officer contends there were reasonable grounds and an arrest. | Arrest unlawful; breath-test request not authorized. |
| Did probable cause exist to arrest Sloop for DUI at the scene? | Undisputed facts showed no sufficient probable cause. | Court should apply Campbell standard for probable cause. | No probable cause; arrest invalid. |
| Does suspension under 8-1014(a)(1) stand when based on an unauthorized breath test? | Suspension invalid if test was not statutorily authorized. | Suspension upheld despite potential invalidity of arrest. | Suspension invalid; driving privileges reinstated. |
Key Cases Cited
- Schuster v. State Dept. of Tax. & Revenue, 283 P.3d 288 (N.M.2012) (arrest must be constitutional for license revocation)
- State v. Hendrix, 289 Kan. 859 (Kan. 2009) (statutory interpretation; legislative intent governs)
- Allen v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue, 292 Kan. 653 (Kan. 2010) (probable cause evaluated by totality of the circumstances)
- Bruch v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue, 282 Kan. 764 (Kan. 2006) (probable cause does not require guilt beyond reasonable doubt)
- Sullivan v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue, 15 Kan. App. 2d 705 (Kan. App. 1991) (probable cause: more than a possibility standard cited)
- Lamb v. United States, 209 Kan. 453 (Kan. 1972) (probable cause sufficient when lead reasonable officer to belief of guilt)
- Campbell v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue, 25 Kan. App. 2d 430 (Kan. App. 1998) (probable cause standard discussed; distinguishable fact pattern)
- Draper v. United States, 358 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1959) (probable cause defined as reasonable belief of guilt)