Windish v. State

Decision Date21 December 1977
Docket NumberNo. 9242,9242
Citation93 Nev. 636,572 P.2d 210
PartiesSteve Frank WINDISH, Appellant, v. The STATE of Nevada, Respondent.
CourtNevada Supreme Court
James L. Buchanan, II, Las Vegas, for appellant.
OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Appellant sought judicial review of the decision of the Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles' hearing officer which concluded appellant had violated NRS 484.383 by refusing to submit to a chemical test to determine the alcohol content of his blood. 1 Appellant contended in the district court that the evidence adduced at the hearing was insufficient to identify him as the person charged with the offense. The district court rejected appellant's assignment of error and here appellant reasserts the same contention.

In reviewing the hearing officer's decision, this court is limited, as is the district court, to a review of the evidence presented at the hearing to determine if the decision was supported by the evidence. See Miller v. West, 88 Nev. 105, 493 P.2d 1332 (1972); cf. Nevada Industrial Comm'n v. Williams, 91 Nev. 686, 541 P.2d 905 (1975). In our view, there is substantial evidence to support that decision. See NRS 233B.140; cf. People v. Tunstall, 17 Ill.2d 160, 161 N.E.2d 300 (1959); State v. Johnson, 12 Wash.App. 40, 527 P.2d 1324 (1974).

Affirmed.

1 NRS 484.383 provides, in pertinent part:

"1. Except as provided in subsections 4 and 5, any person who drives a vehicle upon a highway in this state shall be deemed to have given his consent to a chemical test of his blood, urine, breath or other bodily substance for the purpose of determining the alcoholic content of his blood or the presence of a controlled substance when such test is administered at the direction of a police officer having reasonable grounds to believe that such person was driving a vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a controlled substance and after such person was arrested for any offense allegedly committed while such person was driving a vehicle under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a controlled substance.

"2. Such person shall be informed that his failure to submit to such test will result in the suspension of his privilege to drive a vehicle for a period of 6 months."

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Moran v. Godinez
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • 2 Junio 1995
    ... ... With this change the sentence will read: ...         When a state court wrongfully fails to hold a competency hearing, "it often may be impossible to repair the damage retrospectively." ...         2. At ... ...
  • Moran v. Godinez
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • 15 Noviembre 1994
    ... ...         Richard Allan Moran pleaded guilty to three counts of capital murder and was sentenced to death by a Nevada state court. After exhausting his state court appeals, he filed a petition for habeas corpus in the United States District Court for the District of ... ...
  • Turk v. Nevada State Prison
    • United States
    • Nevada Supreme Court
    • 2 Marzo 1978
    ...decision and, further we perceive no abuse of the hearing officer's discretion in approving appellant's dismissal. Windish v. State, 93 Nev. 636, 572 P.2d 210 (1977); Barnum v. Williams, 84 Nev. 37, 436 P.2d 219 (1968); Bd. Chiropractic Exam'rs v. Babtkis, 83 Nev. 385, 432 P.2d 498 2. In su......
  • Diotallevi v. Second Judicial Dist. Court
    • United States
    • Nevada Supreme Court
    • 21 Diciembre 1977
    ...572 P.2d 214 ... 93 Nev. 633 ... Pietro DIOTALLEVI, Petitioner, ... The SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT of the State of Nevada ... and Honorable John W. Barrett, Judge thereof, Respondents ... Supreme Court of Nevada ... Dec. 21, 1977 ...         Swanson, ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT