Marshall v. State ex rel. Dept. of Transp., 96-178

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
Citation941 P.2d 42
Docket NumberNo. 96-178,96-178
Parties119 Ed. Law Rep. 1213 In the Matter of the Driver'S License Suspension of: Daniel Len MARSHALL, Appellant (Petitioner), v. STATE of Wyoming ex rel., DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Appellee (Respondent).
Decision Date25 June 1997

Page 42

941 P.2d 42
119 Ed. Law Rep. 1213
In the Matter of the Driver'S License Suspension of: Daniel Len MARSHALL, Appellant (Petitioner),
v.
STATE of Wyoming ex rel., DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Appellee (Respondent).
No. 96-178.
Supreme Court of Wyoming.
June 25, 1997.

Page 43

Brian N. Beisher, argued of Hart & Reiter, Sheridan, for Appellant.

William U. Hill, Attorney General; Michael L. Hubbard, Deputy Attorney General; and Lawrence A. Bobbitt, III, argued, Senior Assistant Attorney General. for Appellee.

Before TAYLOR, C.J., and THOMAS, MACY, GOLDEN and LEHMAN, JJ.

LEHMAN, Justice.

Campus police arrested Daniel Len Marshall off campus for driving while intoxicated. Marshall refused chemical testing and, as a result, the Wyoming Department of Transportation (DOT) suspended his license pursuant to Wyoming's implied consent statute. The Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) upheld the suspension, finding that the campus police officer had statewide jurisdiction and therefore the authority to make the off-campus stop and arrest. Marshall seeks review of the hearing examiner's order.

We reverse.

Appellant Marshall poses the following issues:

A. Whether the Hearing Examiner ruled contrary to law in deciding that the campus peace officer in this case did not exceed his jurisdiction due to the fact that campus peace officers have "statewide jurisdiction."

B. Whether the fresh pursuit doctrine operates to make legal the campus peace officer's arrest of Appellant.

C. Whether consideration of the Appellant's refusal to submit to chemical testing as required by Wyoming Statute Section 31-6-102, is precluded due to the unlawful stop and arrest, and the exclusionary rule.

Appellee, Wyoming Department of Transportation, responds with the following issue:

Does the record contain substantial evidence to establish compliance with the implied consent statute? In particular, does the record establish that the officer made a lawful arrest, that the officer obtained probable cause to believe that Appellant had been driving under the influence on a

Page 44

public street or highway, and that Appellant refused to submit to a chemical test?

Marshall reframed the issues in his reply brief as:

A. Whether the fresh pursuit doctrine operates to make legal the campus peace officer's arrest of Appellant.

B. Whether, if the fresh pursuit doctrine does not make legal the campus peace officer's arrest of Appellant, the campus peace officer's arrest of Appellant was a legal citizen's arrest.

FACTS

On February 4, 1996, Sheridan College Police Officer John R. Burch heard a broadcast on his police radio, reporting a stolen 1994 burgundy Oldsmobile Ciera with a Sheridan Motors plate on the front and a dealer plate on the back. Later that morning, Officer Burch spotted Marshall driving past the Sheridan College campus on U.S. Highway 87 in a maroon 1984 Oldsmobile. Officer Burch was unable to clearly see Marshall's license plates, but because of the similarity in the color and model of Marshall's automobile to the car reported stolen, Officer Burch pulled onto Highway 87 behind Marshall. After following Marshall for approximately one mile, Officer Burch pulled him over. At that time Marshall was not on the Sheridan College campus, nor had he previously ventured on to the campus.

Once Marshall was stopped, Officer Burch realized that Marshall's vehicle was not the stolen car. However, he became suspicious that Marshall was driving under the influence of alcohol because he detected a strong odor of alcohol and noted that Marshall's speech was slurred and he was unsteady on his feet. After conducting field sobriety tests, Officer Burch placed Marshall under arrest for driving while under the influence (DWUI). Based on Marshall's refusal to undergo chemical testing after his arrest, DOT suspended his license pursuant to W.S. 31-6-102 (1994).

Marshall requested a contested case hearing, which the OAH conducted on March 18, 1996. The hearing examiner determined that the stop and subsequent arrest of Marshall were supported by a reasonable articulable suspicion and that Officer Burch acted within his jurisdiction. As a result, the examiner found that the arrest was lawful and that DOT had authority to suspend Marshall's license. Marshall filed a Petition for Review of Administrative Action with the district court. The district court certified the appeal to the Wyoming Supreme Court pursuant to W.R.A.P. 12.09(b).

STANDARD OF REVIEW

This appeal is based solely on the hearing examiner's conclusions of law; no factual matters are at issue. We afford no deference to an agency's conclusions of law, and shall "hold unlawful and set aside agency action, findings and conclusions found to be * * * [a]rbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law[.]" W.S. 16-3-114(c)(ii)(A); Thunder Basin Coal Co. v. State Bd. of Equalization, 896 P.2d 1336, 1338 (Wyo.1995).

DISCUSSION

Marshall's license was revoked pursuant to Wyoming's implied consent statute, which requires suspension of a driver's Wyoming license if that person is arrested for DWUI and refuses chemical testing. W.S....

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Colyer v. State, Dept. of Transp., S-08-0183.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • 25 mars 2009
    ...purely a question of law that we review de novo. Worcester v. State, 2001 WY 82, ¶ 13, 30 P.3d 47, 52 (Wyo.2001); Marshall v. State ex rel. DOT, 941 P.2d 42, 44 (Wyo.1997). That review takes place within the context of the statutorily based standards for the review of administrative agency ......
  • Vogt v. State, S–12–0283.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • 9 octobre 2013
    ...2013), the State was required to show the arrest was lawful under § 31–6–102(a)(i)(A) (LexisNexis 2013). Batten, citing Marshall v. State, 941 P.2d 42, 44 (Wyo.1997). See also Colyer v. State, 2009 WY 43, ¶ 10 n. 2, 203 P.3d 1104, 1111 n. 2 (Wyo.2009). Section 31–6–102 provides in relevant ......
  • Batten v. Dept. of Transp. Drivers' License, 06-290.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • 2 novembre 2007
    ...the provisions of the implied consent statute do not apply to mandate suspension of his driver's license. Marshall v. State ex rel. Dep't of Transp., 941 P.2d 42, 44, 46 (Wyo.1997). 1. Reasonable Suspicion [¶ 9] The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Art. 1, § 4 of the W......
  • Williams v. State ex rel. Wyoming Workers' Compensation Division, 97-125.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • 14 avril 2000
    ...to the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and construction. Marshall v. State ex rel. Dept. of Transp., 941 P.2d 42, 45 (Wyo.1997); Newton v. State ex rel. Wyoming Workers' Compensation Div., 922 P.2d 863, 865 (Wyo.1996). When the language of t......

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