Rust v. Department of Motor Vehicles, Division of Driver's Licenses
| Citation | 73 Cal.Rptr. 366,267 Cal.App.2d 545 |
| Court | California Court of Appeals |
| Decision Date | 21 November 1968 |
| Parties | Charles William RUST, Petitioner and Respondent, v. DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, State of California, DIVISION OF DRIVER'S LICENSES and Verne Orr, Director, Respondents and Appellants. Civ. 8887. |
The Department of Motor Vehicles, the Division of Driver's Licenses and Verne Orr, Director, appeal from a judgment entered August 8, 1967 granting Charles William Rust's petition for a peremptory writ of mandamus setting aside the Department's suspension of Rust's driver's license for his failure to submit to one of the three tests required by Vehicle Code, section 13353.
On March 31, 1967, having probable cause to believe Charles William Rust was driving an automobile on a highway while drunk, California Highway Patrol Officer Johnson stopped him and gave him a field sobriety test, which he flunked. In the course of telling Rust his Miranda rights Johnson said he had a right, beginning at that moment, to an attorney. Rust said he understood. Johnson arrested him and placed him in the patrol car. While traveling to the station Johnson requested Rust to submit to a blood alcohol test of his blood, breath or urine, stating if he refused his driving privilege would be suspended six months. Rust replied he refused until he called his attorney, he had taken a field test and would not take another. Rust was then taken to the jail and booked.
The trial court in the mandamus proceeding found Rust's response refusing to take a test until he called his attorney 'did not constitute an unequivocal rejection of said test sufficient to excuse said peace officer from supplying further information to petitioner.'
A suspected drunk driver has refused to take the blood alcohol test when he conditions his consent on having counsel present; he is not entitled to the advice of counsel in connection with the test (Ent v. Department of Motor Vehicles, 265 A.C.A. 1073, 71 Cal.Rptr. 726; Finley v. Orr, 262 A.C.A. 711, 69 Cal.Rptr. 137; see also United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218, 87 S.Ct. 1926, 18 L.Ed.2d 1149; Gilbert v. California, 388 U.S. 263, 87 S.Ct. 1951, 18 L.Ed.2d 1178; Stoval v. Denno, 388 U.S. 293, 87 S.Ct. 1967, 18 L.Ed.2d 1199).
In Ent and Finley the suspected drunk drivers first asserted their non-existent rights to counsel in connection with the test. Here, however, Officer Johnson introduced the subject, telling Rust he had...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Goodman v. Orr
...unless the officer then informs the suspect that the Miranda warning is inapplicable to the test. (Rust v. Department of Motor Vehicles, 267 Cal.App.2d 545, 547, 73 Cal.Rptr. 366; Kingston v. Department of Motor Vehicles, 271 Cal.App.2d 549, 554, 76 Cal.Rptr. 614, demand for counsel 'miscon......
-
Kurecka v. State
...519 P.2d 341 (1974); McDonnell v. Dep't of Motor Vehicles, 45 Cal.App.3d 653, 119 Cal.Rptr. 804 (1975); Rust v. Dep't of Motor Vehicles, 267 Cal.App.2d 545, 73 Cal.Rptr. 366 (1968); State v. Severino, 56 Haw. 378, 537 P.2d 1187 (1975); State v. Beckey, 291 Minn. 483, 192 N.W.2d 441 (1971); ......
-
Davis v. State
...conditioned on obtaining the advice of counsel amounts to a refusal to take the test. See Rust v. Department of Motor Vehicles, Div. of Driver's Lic., 267 Cal.App.2d 545, 73 Cal.Rptr. 366, 367 (1968) ('A suspected drunk driver has refused to take the blood alcohol test when he conditioned h......
-
Hall v. Secretary of State
...of his right to counsel and then refuses to take the test until given an opportunity to call counsel. Rust v. Department of Motor Vehicles, 267 Cal.App.2d 545, 73 Cal.Rptr. 366 (1968), Wiseman v. Sullivan, 190 Neb. 724, 211 N.W.2d 906 (1973), State Department of Highways v. Beckey, 291 Minn......
-
Table of cases
...v. Superior Court (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 1343, §§5:54.2, 5:81.1 Russell v. Dopp (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 765, §4:16.6 Rust v. DMV (1968) 267 Cal.App.2d 545, §11:142.4.5 Ryan v. Commission on Judicial Performance (1988) 45 Cal.3d 518, §§3:56, 4:15.24, 10:35.9 -S- Salinas v. Texas , (2013) 570 U.......
-
DMV proceedings
...a refusal may be properly found–to clarify that there is no such right during chemical test selection and testing. Rust v. DMV (1968) 267 Cal.App.2d 545; Kingston v. DMV (1969) 271 Cal.App.2d 549; Walker v. DMV (1969) 274 Cal.App.2d 793; Smith v. DMV (1969) 1 Cal.App.3d 499 (where officer-i......
-
Administrative hearings
..., 291 Minn. 483, 192 N.W.2d 441 (1971). See also, Graham v. State , 633 P.2d 211 (Alaska 1981); Rust v. Department of Motor Vehicles , 267 Cal. App. 2d 545, 73 Cal. Rptr. 366 (Cal. App. 4th Dist. 1968) (holding that an officer must advise an arrested person who refuses to submit to a Breath......