Mullens v. Department of Public Safety, Drivers License Division

• Decision Date: 10 February 1976
• Docket Number: No. 7184,7184
• Citation: 327 So.2d 492
• Parties: Griven A. MULLENS v. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, DRIVERS LICENSE DIVISION.
• Court: Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US

Page 492

327 So.2d 492

Griven A. MULLENS v. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, DRIVERS LICENSE DIVISION.

No. 7184.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit.

Feb. 10, 1976.

Rehearing Denied March 16, 1976.

Writ Refused May 26, 1976.

Ronald P. Herman, Metairie, and Edward A. Armstrong, Jr., New Orleans, for plaintiff-appellant.

Foye L. Lowe, Jr., Baton Rouge, for defendant-appellee.

Before SAMUEL, REDMANN and SCHOTT, JJ.

SAMUEL, Judge.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the Twenty-fourth Judicial District Court affirming the action of the Louisiana Department of Public Safety in suspending appellant's driving privileges under R.S . 32:667 because of his failure to submit to a test to determine the alcoholic content of his blood.

The facts are basically not disputed. Appellant, Griven A. Mullens, was arrested by a Jefferson Parish deputy sheriff on March 17, 1974 and charged with violation of R.S. 14:98, driving while intoxicated. While incarcerated, a police officer requested Mullens to submit to a photoelectric intoximeter (P.E.I.) test to determine the percentage of alcohol in his blood pursuant to the various provisions of the implied consent law, R.S. 32:661, et seq. Mullens refused to subject himself to the test, and the police forwarded a statement certifying this fact to the Department of Public Safety. On the basis of this certification, the Department of Public Safety ordered the suspension of Mullens' driving privileges for a period of six months.

Timely request was made by Mullens for an administrative hearing pursuant to law. During this administrative hearing, the Department did not call any witnesses, but relied on documentary evidence, while Mullens testified and submitted an affidavit. No other evidence was introduced. Following the hearing, the original suspension of driving privileges was affirmed.

Appellant perfected a timely appeal to the Twenty-fourth Judicial District Court. At that hearing on December 13, 1974, the Department for the first time introduced the testimony of one of the police officers whose name appeared as a witness on the statement certifying appellant's refusal to submit to the P.E.I. test. The district court affirmed the suspension of appellant's license, and this appeal ensued.

The two issues raised for this court's consideration by this appeal are: (1) whether the proceeding in the district court to review the administrative hearing shall be conducted as an appeal or as a trial de novo; and (2) whether appellant's license can be suspended in view of the ruling of the Louisiana Supreme Court in State v. Jones. ¹ Our conclusion on the second issue, that the license cannot be suspended in view of the ruling in Jones, makes a consideration of the first issue unnecessary.

In State v. Jones, ² the court held that before the State may rely on the statutory presumption of intoxication created by a positive P.E.I. test, it must offer into evidence the permit or certificate of the machine operator and must show the test was performed in conformance with standards approved by the Louisiana Department of Health (now the Louisiana Health and Human Resources Administration). In that case, the court stated the State may not avail itself of the presumption of intoxication arising from positive test results until the Health and Human Resources Administration establishes and promulgates carefully detailed methods, procedures, and techniques covering repair, maintenance, inspection, cleaning, chemical accuracy, and certification of P.E.I. equipment and until the State adduces evidence that such a test was performed in conformity with such methods, procedures, and techniques.

In the course of its decision, the Supreme Court rejected the State's argument that the provisions of R.S. 32:663 were met by (1) a letter dated September 19, 1969 from George H. Hauser, M.D., Director of the Bureau of Laboratories, to the assistant director of the State Police Crime Laboratory, stating techniques of breath analysis taught in a 40 hour course given by the Division of State Police and measured by the photoelectric intoximeter 'is hereby approved by the Louisiana State Department of Health' and (2) a pronouncement by the Health and Human Resources Administration dated December 19, 1974, stating 'the method approved for breath testing for alcohol is the Photoelectric Intoximeter Test performed with the instrument manufactured by Intoximeter, Inc.,...