State of Indiana and Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles v. Nicholas Hargrave
2016 Ind. App. LEXIS 26
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Nicholas Hargrave (CDL holder) was arrested for OWI with breath alcohol .21; charged with two Class A misdemeanor OWI counts.
- BMV immediately suspended his license; Hargrave surrendered his CDL two weeks after arrest.
- Hargrave pleaded guilty; trial court withheld judgment and placed him in a diversion program with deferred disposition contingent on completion.
- Hargrave sought reinstatement without SR22 proof; BMV refused and moved to intervene, arguing federal/state law (49 C.F.R. § 384.226 adopted by Ind. Code) prohibits masking/diversion for CDL holders and that SR22 proof is required for three years.
- Trial court denied BMV’s motion to correct error; State appealed.
- Court of Appeals held the BMV’s interpretations were reasonable and reversed: diversion was prohibited for persons who held CDLs at the time of the offense, and SR22 proof is required for three years after suspension termination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a court may defer judgment / allow diversion for a person who held a CDL at time of offense | Hargrave: surrendering CDL before diversion removes CDL-holder status and permits diversion | BMV/State: federal anti-masking regulation (adopted by Indiana) bars masking/diversion for anyone who held a CDL at time of the offense | Court: BMV’s interpretation reasonable; diversion/withholding judgment is prohibited for CDL holders at time of offense; trial court abused discretion |
| Whether SR22 proof of financial responsibility may be waived on reinstatement | Hargrave: trial court ordered reinstatement without SR22 requirement | BMV/State: Ind. Code § 9-30-6-12 requires proof of financial responsibility for three years after suspension following court-recommended suspension under ch. 9-30-6 | Court: Hargrave must file SR22 proof for three years after suspension termination; trial court erred in waiving it |
Key Cases Cited
- Garrett v. Spear, 24 N.E.3d 472 (Ind. Ct. App.) (standard for reviewing denial of motion to correct error; abuse of discretion when contrary to law)
- Ind. Wholesale Wine & Liquor Co. v. State ex rel. Ind. Alcoholic Beverage Comm’n, 695 N.E.2d 99 (Ind.) (deference to reasonable agency interpretation of statute)
- Miller Brewing Co. v. Bartholomew Cnty. Beverage Co., 674 N.E.2d 193 (Ind. Ct. App.) (agency abandonment of prior position reduces deference to that prior position)