ยง

Byrd v. Commissioner of Public Safety

348 N.W.2d 402 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984)
Byrd v. Commissioner of Public Safety

5 Citing cases

  1. Henrickson v. Comm. of Pub. Safety

    No. A08-0460 (Minn. Ct. App. Jan. 13, 2009)

    Each statute sets forth the same basic requirements of a DWI offense: (1) "physical control" of a vehicle, and (2) alcohol concentration of .08 within two hours of that physical control. Minn. Stat. ยง 169A.20, subd. 1; N.D. Cent. Code ยง 39-08-01. If Henrickson had been convicted in Minnesota of the offense to which he pleaded guilty in North Dakota, his license would have been revoked. See Anderson, 305 N.W.2d at 787; Dempski v. Commissioner of Pub. Safety, 520 N.W.2d 532, 533 (Minn.App. 1994); Recker v. State, Dep't of Pub. Safety, 375 N.W.2d 554, 556 (Minn.App. 1985); Byrd v. Commissioner of Pub. Safety, 348 N.W.2d 402, 404 (Minn.App. 1984). It is irrelevant that North Dakota and Minnesota use slightly different methods of measuring alcohol concentration. See Anderson, 305 N.W.2d at 787.

  2. Phillippe v. Commissioner of Public Safety

    374 N.W.2d 293 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985)   Cited 11 times
    Holding that when the commissioner acts pursuant to internal office policy and not promulgated rules, this court determines whether the decision was reasonable

    The only conclusion which we can draw from this action is that the legislature did not intend that convictions for violation of an ordinance should be considered in determining the length of time of a revocation under Minn.Stat. ยง 169.121, subd. 4. See Korf v. State, 290 Minn. 245, 187 N.W.2d 638 (1971) (considering a different statute which precluded revocation for conviction under an ordinance). We have discussed this particular section before. Byrd v. Commissioner of Public Safety, 348 N.W.2d 402 (Minn.Ct.App. 1984). In Byrd, we found that the clause did not prevent consideration of offenses committed in other states for determining the number of offenses under Minn.Stat. ยง 169.121, subd. 4, because of the mandate from Minn.Stat. ยง 171.17(7) (1984).

  3. Sullivan v. Commissioner of Public Safety

    371 N.W.2d 569 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985)   Cited 1 times
    In Sullivan v. Commissioner of Public Safety, 371 N.W.2d 569 (Minn.Ct.App. 1985), this court held that Minn.Stat. ยง 171.30, subd. 3, "is mandatory in that the Commissioner shall issue a limited Class A license for work-related purposes."

    Whenever the Commissioner cancelled a license and denied reinstatement because of three alcohol-related driving incidents or four incidents on record, the supreme court and this court have generally affirmed the Commissioner's policy. See State v. Hanson, 356 N.W.2d at 693; Pruszinske, 330 N.W.2d at 890; Byrd v. Commissioner of Public Safety, 348 N.W.2d 402, 404 (Minn.Ct.App. 1984) (denial of limited license not arbitrary and capricious even though employment required a valid license). Additionally, the Commissioner properly considered Sullivan's two DWI convictions even though they are more than ten years old.

  4. Hintz v. Commissioner of Public Safety

    364 N.W.2d 486 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985)   Cited 9 times
    Holding six DWI offenses on driver's record grounds for cancellation of license as inimical to public safety

    Assuming Hintz's request for a limited license is a petition for reinstatement, State v. Hanson, 356 N.W.2d 689 (Minn. 1984); Byrd v. Commissioner of Public Safety, 348 N.W.2d 402 (Minn.Ct.App. 1984), see Pruszinske v. State, Commissioner of Highways, 330 N.W.2d 887 (Minn. 1983), he had the burden of showing that the Commissioner's action in refusing a limited license exceeded his authority and constituted an abuse of discretion. McIntee v. State, Department of Public Safety, 279 N.W.2d 817, 821 (Minn.

  5. State v. Geyer

    355 N.W.2d 460 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984)   Cited 3 times
    In Geyer, the defendant argued that an Ohio driving-while-impaired conviction could not be used to enhance a Minnesota driving-while-impaired conviction because the states' implied consent statutes were not in conformity: "Minnesota's implied consent statute requires that a person be advised that he may consult with an attorney before taking a breath, blood or urine test.

    Id. at 668. This court approvingly cited Anderson and Barutt in Byrd v. Commissioner of Public Safety, 348 N.W.2d 402 (Minn.Ct.App. 1984), where we said "we are compelled to conclude that the legislature intended that a licensee's entire record be considered under Minn.Stat. 169.121, Subd. 4(d), without regard to the state in which that record was compiled." Id. at 404.