Melton v. Hodges, No. 9310SC926
| Docket Nº | No. 9310SC926 |
| Citation | 443 S.E.2d 83, 114 N.C.App. 795 |
| Case Date | May 17, 1994 |
| Court | Court of Appeal of North Carolina (US) |
Page 83
v.
Robert F. HODGES, Commissioner, Division of Motor Vehicles
of the State of North Carolina, Respondent.
[114 N.C.App. 796] John F. Oates, Jr., Raleigh, for petitioner appellant.
Attorney General Michael F. Easley by Asst. Atty. Gen., Bryan E. Beatty, Raleigh, for respondent appellee.
COZORT, Judge.
Petitioner appeals from a judgment affirming the revocation of his driving privileges for one year based on his willful refusal to submit to an intoxilyzer test. Petitioner's sole argument on appeal is that the superior court abused its discretion by basing its decision on unreliable and incompetent hearsay evidence. We find this argument unpersuasive and affirm the judgment entered.
The parties stipulated that the sole issue to be decided by the superior court was whether the charging officer at the time of the arrest had reasonable grounds to believe that petitioner had committed an implied consent offense. In resolving this issue, the court found as follows:
2. On April 3, 1992 at approximately 9:10 pm, Officer George Daniels of the Cary Police Dept. responded to a radio call to investigate a report of suspected impaired driver. Officer Daniels arrived at the residence where two female witnesses were waiting outside.
3. [Officer] Daniels spoke with the two witnesses who identified themselves as Ms. Jewell and Ms. Bottger [sic ]. The witnesses stated that they observed a motor vehicle travelling at a high rate of speed [that] almost ran the witness's vehicle off of the road on the Cary Parkway. The witnesses followed the vehicle and observed it weaving and run off the road and strike a stop sign. The witnesses followed the vehicle to the residence and observed a man in a white shirt and blue pants exit the vehicle and fall to the ground. The man went into the residence. One of the witnesses contacted the Cary Police Department while the other waited at the residence. The witnesses told Officer Daniels that only three to five minutes passed from the time the police department was contacted to the time Officer Daniels arrived at the residence.
4. Officer Daniels felt the hood and exhaust pipe of the vehicle that the witnesses said they followed to the residence. The hood and exhaust pipe were hot. Officer Daniels also observed a liquor bottle in the passenger compartment of the vehicle.
[114 N.C.App. 797] 5. Officer Daniels went to the door of the residence and was allowed to enter the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Steinkrause v. Tatum, No. COA08-1080.
...to base his determination of reasonable grounds on information given by one known to him to be reasonably reliable. Melton v. Hodges, 114 N.C.App. 795, 798, 443 S.E.2d 83, 85 In this case, an officer on the scene smelled an odor of alcohol about the Petitioner. That the arresting officer di......
-
MVA v. McDorman, No. 94
...hearsay evidence may meet substantial evidence test to support revocation of license if relevant and probative); Melton v. Hodges, 114 N.C.App. 795, 443 S.E.2d 83, 85 (1994) (stating that, in determining whether reasonable grounds exist under implied consent statute, the reasonable grounds ......
-
Motor Vehicle Administration v. McDorman, No. 94
...purely hearsay evidence may meet substantial evidence test to support revocation of license if relevant and probative); Melton v. Hodges, 443 S.E.2d 83, 85 (N.C. Ct. App. 1994) (stating that, in determining whether reasonable grounds exist under implied consent statute, the reasonable groun......
-
Bullard v. USAir, Inc., No. 935DC938
...when a North Carolina-based company sued its out-of-state employee in North Carolina). In contrast, Toth interacted with North Carolina [114 N.C.App. 795] residents while they were not in North Carolina. This encounter did not establish any contacts with the state of North Because the recor......
-
Steinkrause v. Tatum, No. COA08-1080.
...to base his determination of reasonable grounds on information given by one known to him to be reasonably reliable. Melton v. Hodges, 114 N.C.App. 795, 798, 443 S.E.2d 83, 85 In this case, an officer on the scene smelled an odor of alcohol about the Petitioner. That the arresting officer di......
-
MVA v. McDorman, No. 94
...hearsay evidence may meet substantial evidence test to support revocation of license if relevant and probative); Melton v. Hodges, 114 N.C.App. 795, 443 S.E.2d 83, 85 (1994) (stating that, in determining whether reasonable grounds exist under implied consent statute, the reasonable grounds ......
-
Motor Vehicle Administration v. McDorman, No. 94
...purely hearsay evidence may meet substantial evidence test to support revocation of license if relevant and probative); Melton v. Hodges, 443 S.E.2d 83, 85 (N.C. Ct. App. 1994) (stating that, in determining whether reasonable grounds exist under implied consent statute, the reasonable groun......
-
Bullard v. USAir, Inc., No. 935DC938
...when a North Carolina-based company sued its out-of-state employee in North Carolina). In contrast, Toth interacted with North Carolina [114 N.C.App. 795] residents while they were not in North Carolina. This encounter did not establish any contacts with the state of North Because the recor......