In Re Wright

• Decision Date: 10 December 1947
• Docket Number: No. 604.,604.
• Citation: 45 S.E.2d 370,228 N.C. 301
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court
• Parties: In re WRIGHT

45 S.E.2d 370

228 N.C. 301

In re WRIGHT

No. 604.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Dec. 10, 1947.

Appeal from Superior Court, Columbus County; J. J. Burney, Judge.

Proceeding by Wilbur Anderson Wright to review an order of the Department of Motor Vehicles revoking petitioner's license to operate a motor vehicle. From an order directing the Department to cancel the revocation and restore the license to petitioner, the Department appeals.

Affirmed.

Petition under G.S. § 20-25 for review of an order of the Department of Motor Vehicles revoking petitioner's automobile driver's license.

On April 10, 1947 petitioner, while operating a motor vehicle in the State of South Carolina, was involved in a collision with another vehicle. He was arrested and charged with the offense of operating a motor vehicle on the highways of South Carolina while under the influence of intoxicants. He gave bond for his appearance at a hearing set for the next day. No warrant was served on him. He avers, and the court below found, that he was not advised of the day of the hearing other than as stated on a paper handed him when he gave bond, and which he took to be a receipt for his money. Being injured in the collision, he took a bus and returned to his home at Tabor City. He did not attend the hearing and his bond was forfeited. There was no trial and defendant has never been found guilty of operating a motor vehicle on the public highways of South Carolina while under the influence of intoxicants.

On April 17, 1947 the Director of the Motor Vehicle Division of the State Highway Department of South Carolina advised respondent in part as follows: "The records of the Department reveal that on April 10, 1947 a resident of your State, whose name and address is shown below, was apprehended on a charge of Driving Intoxicated, Date of hearing April 11, 1947, Disposition Guilty, Judicial Officer Mag. Smart, Conway, S. C." A copy thereof was mailed to petitioner.

Upon receipt of said notice the Department of Motor Vehicles, acting under authority conferred by G.S. § 20-23, suspended the driving license of petitioner and on July 24 gave him notice thereof. The petitioner, within 30 days thereafter, filed this petition for review. The respondent filed no answer.

When the petition came on to be heard in the court below, the court found the facts in detail, including many not material on the question here presented for decision. It concluded that although the respondent acted in good faith, its order was based on misinformation; that the license of petitioner was wrongfully revoked; and that he is entitled to retain the same. It therefore entered an order directing the respondent to cancel said suspension and restore said license to petitioner. Respondent excepted and appealed.

Harry M. McMullan, Atty. Gen., and Ralph M. Moody and J. E. Tucker, Asst. Attys. Gen., for respondent appellant.

Powell & Powell, of Whiteville, for petitioner appellee.

BARNHILL, Justice.

The statute, G.S. § 20-16, vests the Department of Motor Vehicles with discretionary authority "to suspend the license ofany operator or chauffeur without preliminary hearing upon a showing by its records or other satisfactory evidence that the licensee: * * * 7. Has committed an offense in another state, which if committed in this state would be grounds for suspension or revocation;" and in this State the revocation of a driver's license is mandatory whenever it is made to appear that the licensee has been found guilty of "Driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a narcotic drug." G. S. § 20-17(2). Hence the department had the right to act upon receipt of the information furnished by the State Highway...