State v. Carlisle
| Decision Date | 10 April 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. 51,51 |
| Citation | 204 S.E.2d 15,285 N.C. 229 |
| Parties | STATE of North Carolina v. Preston Maynard CARLISLE. |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
Robert Morgan, Atty. Gen., by William W. Melvin and William B. Ray, Asst. Attys. Gen., Raleigh, for the State.
Sasser, Duke & Brown, by John E. Duke, Goldsboro, for defendant appellant.
In order to obtain a license to operate a motor vehicle upon the public highways, the applicant must by examination, satisfy the Department of Motor Vehicles that he is mentally and physically competent to operate a motor vehicle without undue risk to other travelers. The law recognizes that one who has been found to be competent may lose his competency and become an undue hazard before the date his permit expires. Hence, provision is made for revocation of the license for cause. Thus when the holder of a permit becomes a menace to others on the highways be accumulating such number of convictions for violating safety rules as to disclose that he is an habitual offender, Article 8 of Chapter 20 of the General Statutes (G.S. §§ 20--220 to 20--231) makes provision for judicial determination whether proper cause exists for revocation. The permittee has the right of appeal from an adverse judgment.
In Fox v. Scheidt, Comr. of Motor Vehicles, 241 N.C. 31, 84 S.E.2d 259, this Court held:
In Joyner v. Garrett, Comr. of Motor Vehicles, 279 N.C. 226, 182 S.E.2d 553, this Court held:
Our cases offer no support for the view that a revocation proceeding is, in its nature, criminal. The comments of the trial judge in this case, at the time of entering judgment, show his...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rhyne v. K-Mart Corp.
...351 (1991) (forfeiture proceedings); In re Clark, 303 N.C. 592, 281 S.E.2d 47 (1981) (child custody proceedings); State v. Carlisle, 285 N.C. 229, 204 S.E.2d 15 (1974) (driver's license revocation proceedings). The purpose of punitive damages, as its nomenclature indicates, is to punish. Th......
-
State v. Oliver
...they are not intended to punish the offending driver but to protect other members of the driving public."); State v. Carlisle, 285 N.C. 229, 232, 204 S.E.2d 15, 16 (1974) ("The purpose of a revocation proceeding is not to punish the offender, but to remove from the highway one who is a pote......
-
Williams v. Speights
...to operate motor vehicles" and observing that "drivers without licenses arepresumably the less safe drivers"); State v. Carlisle, 285 N.C. 229, 232, 204 S.E.2d 15, 16 (1974) ("The purpose of the [driver's license] revocation proceeding is... to remove from the highway one who is a potential......
-
State v. Anton
...a reasonable regulatory measure to protect public safety. See State v. Carlisle, 20 N.C.App. 358, 201 S.E.2d 704, 706, aff'd, 285 N.C. 229, 204 S.E.2d 15 (1974); see also Brown, 280 Or. at 105, 570 P.2d at 58; Schulz, 100 Wis.2d at 331, 302 N.W.2d at 61; Clark, supra n. 10, at 475. In sum, ......