Opinion
No. 31-79
Opinion Filed September 10, 1979
Courts — Jurisdiction — Collateral Attack
In a prosecution for driving while under license suspension, claim that underlying suspension was illegal because of illegal delegation of authority to impose suspension within the Department of Motor Vehicles does not reach jurisdiction of person or subject matter in the suspension proceeding and is not appropriate for collateral attack in the criminal prosecution. 23 V.S.A. § 674.
Appeal following conviction of driving while under license suspension. District Court, Unit No. 4, Caledonia Circuit, Connarn, J., presiding. Affirmed.
Dale O. Gray, Caledonia County State's Attorney, and Christopher B. Leopold, Deputy State's Attorney, St. Johnsbury, for Plaintiff.
James L. Morse, Defender General, and William A. Nelson, Appellate Defender, Montpelier, and David A. Howard, Public Defender, St. Johnsbury, for Defendant.
Present: Barney, C.J., Daley, Larrow and Hill, JJ., and Smith, J. (Ret.), Specially Assigned
This case, a conviction for driving a motor vehicle upon a public highway while under license suspension (23 415 V.S.A. § 674), was argued and submitted along with State v. Putnam, 137 Vt. 410, 407 A.2d 161, this day decided. The same legal considerations admittedly govern its determination. In this case, as in Putnam, supra, at least one suspension was challenged only by the claim that authority to impose it was illegally delegated within the Department of Motor Vehicles. As we held in Putnam, this challenge does not reach jurisdiction of person or subject matter in the suspension proceeding, and is not appropriate for collateral attack in the criminal prosecution.
Judgment affirmed.