Two cases after one arrest: the license case and the court case

Michigan's statute, MCL 257.625f, provides that if a person who refused a chemical test requests a hearing, the secretary of state holds it in the manner and under the conditions of a cross-referenced section. The hearing officer may administer oaths, issue subpoenas for necessary witnesses and grant a reasonable request for an adjournment, subject to a limit on adjournments.

Missouri's statute, Mo. Rev. Stat. § 302.530, describes a request for administrative review of the department's determination at a hearing. The hearing may be held by telephone or, if the person or the person's attorney or representative requests, at a regional location the director designates. It is conducted by examiners licensed to practice law in Missouri and employed by the department.

DC DMV guidance, which is agency guidance rather than a statute, describes a show cause hearing for the alcohol-related offense when a driver requests a hearing after being served with a Notice of Proposed Revocation. A hearing examiner takes testimony from the arresting officer and from the driver, who may be represented by counsel and present witnesses.

Missouri's statute states that the sole issue at the hearing is whether, by a preponderance of the evidence, the person was driving a vehicle under the circumstances set out in a cross-referenced section. The burden of proof is on the state. If the department finds the affirmative, the suspension or revocation order is sustained; if it finds the negative, the order is rescinded.

New Jersey's statute, N.J. Stat. § 39:4-50.4a, addresses a refusal matter in municipal court. The court determines by a preponderance of the evidence whether the arresting officer had probable cause to believe the person was driving or in actual physical control of a motor vehicle on the public highways or quasi-public areas of New Jersey while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, a listed drug, or marijuana or cannabis; whether the person was arrested, if appropriate; and whether the person refused the test on the officer's request. If those elements are not established, the statute says no conviction shall issue.

Michigan's statute says its refusal hearing covers only whether the officer had reasonable grounds, whether the person was arrested, whether any refusal was reasonable, and whether the person was advised of certain rights.

PennDOT guidance, which is agency guidance rather than a statute, says that when a driving privilege is going to be suspended, revoked or disqualified, a written notice is mailed listing the date the sanction will begin. It says the license must be returned by that effective date or police will be notified to pick it up, and that a sanction starts on the effective date regardless of when the license or acknowledgment form is surrendered.

Missouri's statute lets any person who has received a notice of suspension or revocation request a hearing within a period measured from receipt of that notice.

DC DMV guidance says a hearing request must be received within a period measured from service of the Official Notice of Proposed Revocation, with one period for DC residents and another for non-DC residents. The driver presents the license, the Order of Proposed Revocation, the court disposition and other relevant court documents.

Michigan's statute provides that if a person who refused a chemical test does not request a hearing within a period after the date of notice, the secretary of state imposes license sanctions that differ for commercial and noncommercial vehicles and for repeat refusals.

PennDOT guidance says a sanction may be appealed in the Court of Common Pleas (Civil Division) in the driver's county of residence, with the appeal filed within a period measured from the mailing date of the department's notice. The guidance adds that, in addition to serving the sanction, all restoration requirements must be satisfied before the driving privilege is restored.

Missouri's statute requires the department to promptly notify the person of its decision and the reasons for it. One subsection says the decision becomes final within a period from the date the notice was mailed unless the person files an appeal in the circuit court in the county where the arrest occurred; another says the decision is final unless an appeal for judicial review is filed within a period after the person is notified.

Michigan's statute provides that a person who does not prevail at the refusal hearing may petition the circuit court of the county where the arrest was made to review the suspension or denial. If the person prevails, the officer who filed the report may, with the prosecuting attorney's consent, petition that court to review the hearing officer's determination.

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 60-498.02 directs the director to revoke an operator's license at the end of a stated period after arrest, or after a hearing in which the director finds the license should be revoked. It sets one revocation period for a refusal and another for a test disclosing a specified alcohol concentration, with a longer period for the latter when the driving record shows a prior administrative license revocation with a final order within a stated lookback period. For a nonresident, the director revokes the Nebraska operating privilege and forwards the license to the home state.

For a license subject to revocation under a specific cross-referenced subsection, the statute provides that proceedings are dismissed or the license immediately reinstated without the reinstatement fee when the director receives suitable evidence that the prosecutor declined to file or dismissed the complaint before trial, that the defendant was found not guilty after trial, or that the court in the criminal action from the same incident held the officer lacked probable cause or the person was not operating or in actual physical control with a prohibited alcohol concentration. If a charge is later filed or refiled, the director may reinstate the revocation, except one dismissed under another cross-referenced section.

Deadlines, limits and penalty ranges are set by each state’s statutes, so this page does not state them. Each state page shows them with the official source and the date they were verified — or says plainly that a figure has not been confirmed yet.