Earlier this year, the North Carolina Court of Appeals in Edwards v. Jessup, 282 N.C. App. 213 (2022), considered whether a license revocation hearing in which a hearing officer employed by the Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV) both elicited and evaluated evidence, ultimately ordering revocation, violated the petitioning driver’s right to due process. Spoiler alert: The Court held that the DMV hearing process did not violate the driver’s constitutional rights. Continue reading to learn why. The backstory. In February 2019, an officer responded to a call that a driver had fallen asleep in a car in the drive-through lane of a fast-food restaurant. When he arrived, the officer found Ida Edwards asleep behind the wheel of a car in the parking lot. After observing signs that Edwards was impaired and hearing her admit that she had recently taken Hydrocodone, the officer arrested Edwards for impaired driving. Edwards later refused to consent to the withdrawal of her blood for analysis. That refusal triggered the officer to execute and submit to DMV a sworn affidavit (form AOC-CVR-1A) stating that Edwards was charged with impaired driving, the officer had reasonable grounds to believe Edwards committed that offense, that Edwards was notified of her implied consent rights, and that Edwards willfully refused to submit to a chemical analysis. See G.S. 20-16.2(c1). DMV then notified Edwards that her license would be revoked for one year, but that she could request a DMV hearing before the revocation became effective. G.S. 20-16.2(d). Edwards requested the hearing (which requires [...]
Faculty Coordinators
