Stahl v. Director of Revenue, 22649

Decision Date01 September 1999
Docket NumberNo. 22649,22649
PartiesPaul D. STAHL, Respondent, v. DIRECTOR OF REVENUE, Appellant.
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Evan J. Buchheim, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for appellant.

Phillip J. Barkett, Jr., Sikeston, for respondent.

JOHN E. PARRISH, Judge.

The Director of Revenue (director) appeals a judgment ordering him to rescind a certain "administrative action of 7/7/98" and to expunge entries from the driving record of Paul D. Stahl (petitioner) relating to a 1993 conviction for involuntary manslaughter while operating a motor vehicle in an intoxicated condition. See § 565.024.1(2), RSMo 1986. The judgment is affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded with directions.

On April 15, 1993, petitioner was convicted in the Circuit Court of Crawford County, Missouri, for involuntary manslaughter while operating a motor vehicle while in an intoxicated condition. Director was not notified of that conviction until July 2, 1998. On July 7, 1998, director issued a notice to petitioner stating that on August 8, 1998, his "privilege to drive a motor vehicle in Missouri" would be denied because of the April 15, 1993, conviction. The notice stated petitioner "may be eligible for relicensing after August 8, 1998." It advised petitioner that the notice was a final decision of the director; that pursuant to § 302.311, RSMo 1994, he had 30 days to appeal the decision to the circuit court of his county of residence.

By letter dated August 7, 1998, director notified petitioner:

On August 8, 1998, your privilege to operate a motor vehicle in Missouri is reinstated. This notice is not a permit to operate a motor vehicle.

Our records show your driver's license is in your possession. If your license has been lost, destroyed, stolen, or mutilated, you must apply for a duplicate license.

If you have any questions concerning this reinstatement, please contact the Drivers License Bureau at the above address or telephone number.

Petitioner filed a petition for review in the Circuit Court of Stoddard County, Missouri, requesting that the director be ordered "to rescind and nullify her [sic] actions of 7/7/98" and that he be ordered "to expunge said entry from petitioner's driving record." Following trial the circuit court entered judgment ordering director:

(a) To rescind and nullify his administrative action of 7/7/98 ...; and

(b) To expunge from the Missouri dirivng [sic] record of Paul D. Stahl the following entries:

DEPARTMENT ACTIONS

5 Year Denial (Veh Manslaughter Involved) effective 8-08-1998

Eligible to reinstate on 8-08-1998, actin [sic] is Reinstated as of 8-08-1998

Case PT 9803143

COURT CONVICTIONS

INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER-DWI assessed 12 points

Violation on 5-09-1991 in Non-Commercial Vehicle, ticket no. 999999999

Convicted on 4-15-1993 in CRAWFORD

CRAWFORD CO CIR CRT-STEELVILL [sic]

Microfilm number 98187CO2404

Director appeals contending "[t]he trial court erred in setting aside the Director's denial and immediate reinstatement of [petitioner's] driving privilege based on his conviction for involuntary manslaughter while operating a vehicle in an intoxicated condition" and "in ordering the Director to remove from [petitioner's] driving record information concerning that action and [petitioner's] conviction." Director argues "[petitioner's] license was subject to a five-year denial under § 302.060(10) because of his conviction" and that "the Director is required to maintain information concerning driving-related convictions in a person's driving record." In support of his claim, director argues that the information of petitioner's record was accurate, that information in driving records is relied on by courts, law enforcement, the director, and the public. He contends the information could be relevant in future actions involving petitioner.

Entry Showing "5 Year Denial" and Reinstatement

Director's notice that petitioner's privilege to drive a motor vehicle would be denied for five years based on "being convicted of Vehicular Manslaughter on April 15, 1993," (but might be eligible for immediate relicensing) was dated July 7, 1998. The notice stated, "refer to 302.060, RSMo." The revision of § 302.060 in effect at the time of petitioner's conviction was RSMo Supp.1992. It provided, as applicable to petitioner:

The director shall not issue any license hereunder:

...

(10) To any person ... who has been convicted of the crime of involuntary manslaughter while operating a motor vehicle in an intoxicated condition. The director shall not issue a license to such person for five years from the date such person was convicted for involuntary manslaughter while operating a motor vehicle in an intoxicated condition.... [Emphasis added.]

Under the language of the statute as it existed at the time of petitioner's conviction, director had no authority to take action until an application was made for a new license. Pointer v. Director of Revenue, 891 S.W.2d 876, 878-79 (Mo.App.1995). Director was not given authority to "immediately deny any driving privilege" under those circumstances until 1996 when the language of the statute was changed to provide, "The director shall not issue any license and shall immediately deny any driving privilege:.... " See § 302.060, RSMo Cum.Supp.1996 [emphasis added].

This court does not address whether director could have "immediately" denied petitioner's driving privilege between the time the current version of § 302.060 became effective, i.e., August 28, 1996, see C.C.S.H.S.H.C.S.S.S.S.C.S.S.B. 722 and C.C.S.S.C.S.H.S.H.C.S.H.B. 1169 and 1271, 1996 Mo. Laws, and expiration of five years next following petitioner's date of conviction. Those are not the facts of this case. This court holds that director's action on August 8, 1998, "denying" petitioner's driving privilege "for 5 years...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • Ford v. Director of Revenue
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • February 14, 2000
    ...out by Director, he is responsible for maintaining driving records for Missouri drivers. He refers to Stahl v. Director of Revenue, 998 S.W.2d 601, 603-04 (Mo.App. S.D. 1999), where this court said that driving records are relied on for various purposes, are expected to be accurate, and can......

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