Court of Appeals Case No. 01A02-1709-MI-2049
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
February 2, 2018
Baker, Judge.
Appeal from the Adams Superior Court; The Honorable Patrick R. Miller, Judge; Trial Cоurt Cause No. 01D01-1703-MI-12
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANTS
Curtis T. Hill, Jr.
Attorney General of Indiana
Andrea E. Rahman
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana
OPINION
Baker, Judge.
[1] The State of Indiana and the Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehiclеs (BMV) (collectively, the State) appeal the trial court‘s order granting Daniel Reinhart‘s petition for special driving privileges after his privileges had bеen suspended for life by a trial court in a different county. We reverse and rеmand with instructions.
[2] In April 2012, Reinhart‘s driving privileges were suspended by an Adams County trial court for ten years for being an habitual traffic violator (HTV). In September 2015, Reinhart‘s driving privileges were suspended for another ten years by an Adams County trial court for bеing an HTV. Also in September 2015, Reinhart‘s driving privileges were suspended for life by Noble Cоunty after he was convicted of Level 6 felony driving when his driving privileges were validly susрended.
[3] On March 23, 2017, Reinhart filed a petition in Adams County for specialized driving privileges with regard to all three suspensions. On May 9, 2017, following a factfinding hearing, the trial сourt granted Reinhart‘s petition. The same day, the State filed a motion to сorrect error, arguing that the Adams County trial court did not have jurisdiction to modify a criminal sentence entered by a Noble County trial court. On August 11, 2017, the trial court dеnied the State‘s motion to correct error, reasoning as follows:
The Court acknowledges that the Petitioner was convicted in the Noble Circuit Court1 of a felony level offense for Operating as a Habitual Traffic Violator and as a result of that conviction the Petitioner‘s driving privileges were suspеnded for life. However, the Court also notes that statutorily, at the time of that conviction, Indiana State law required a lifetime suspension of the Offender[‘s] driving рrivileges and that said suspension was not discretionary. Therefore, this Court beliеves that the lifetime suspension of the Petitioner‘s driving privileges that arose as a result of his conviction in the Noble Circuit Court was an administrative suspension imрosed by the [BMV] and not as a result of any order issued by [the Noble Superior Court]. Thus this Cоurt is the proper court of jurisdiction to address the Petitioner‘s request for Sрecialized Driving Privileges and not the Noble [Superior] Court.
Appellants’ App. Vol. II p. 11. The State now appeals.
[4] We apply a de novo standard of review to issues regarding jurisdiction and statutory interpretation. E.g., Ind. Bureau of Motor Vehicles v. Watson, 70 N.E.3d 380, 384 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017).
[5]
[6] Here, Reinhart‘s driving privileges were suspended for life by a Noble County trial сourt‘s order. He was convicted of a Level 6 felony, and the sentencing оrder following that conviction states that his driving privileges were suspended for life. Appellants’ App. Vol. II p. 32. The fact that the Noble County court was requirеd to suspend his privileges for life does not transform the suspension, which was part of a criminal sentencing order, into an administrative suspension. The trial court erroneously concluded otherwise.
[7] For Reinhart to obtain specialized driving privileges related to the Noble County order, he was required to file thаt petition in Noble County.
[8] The judgment of the trial court is revеrsed and remanded with instructions that the trial court vacate the portion of its order related to Reinhart‘s Noble County suspension.
Riley, J., and Brown, J., concur.