State v. NeighborsState v. Neighbors
- Reporters:
- , ,
- Before:
- Richardson
Defendant appeals his conviction for driving while under the influence of intoxicants.
Defendant was arrested and transported to the county jail, where he was asked to take an “intoxilyzer” test. He refused to take the test, and his operator’s license was suspended for 120 days by the Motor Vehicles Division pursuant to
Defendant contends: “The District Court lacked jurisdiction to hear this matter because [defendant] had already paid the penalty prescribed by law of having his driver’s license suspended for 120 days, and standing trial put him twice in jeopardy for the same crime.” Jurisdictional defects may be raised at any time, but the former jeopardy bar is a personal right, not a jurisdictional matter.
See Barnett v. Gladden,
237 Or 76, 390 P2d 614,
cert den
379 US 947 (1964). Therefore, an objection based on former jeopardy must be raised at trial or it is waived.
State of Oregon v. Monk,
199 Or 165, 260 P2d 474 (1953);
Defendant may be raising this issue for the first time on appeal. His brief, submitted
pro se,
does not set out verbatim the pertinent portions of the record as required by our Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.10. The state’s brief asserts that no former jeopardy objection was raised at trial. Regardless of the timing of the objection, it has no merit. A driver’s license suspension under
*885
Defendant also contends that he was denied effective assistance of counsel. This issue more properly can be resolved in a post-conviction proceeding, where defendant’s challenge may be heard at an evidentiary hearing under
Affirmed.