CRYSTAL CUMBERLEDGE
v.
DHSMV
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Petitioner Crystal Cumberledge sought certiorari review of the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles' suspension of her driver's license following her refusal to submit to a breath-alcohol test. The court found that the hearing officer erred by not deeming the breath test technician a critical witness and that the Sheriff's Office's refusal to accept service of a subpoena on that technician constituted a due process violation, resulting in the court quashing the suspension and reinstating her driving privileges.
The court held that Mr. Trendafilov was indeed a critical witness because he was present when the implied consent warning was read, authored the breath alcohol test affidavits, and could testify about notations on the affidavits. The actions of both the hearing officer and the Sheriff's Office denied the petitioner due process of law, and the court granted the petition, quashing the suspension and reinstating driving privileges.
[1] Judicial review of an administrative agency decision is governed by a three-part standard: whether procedural due process was accorded, whether the essential requirements…
[2] A party's due process rights are violated when a sheriff's office refuses to accept service of a subpoena for a critical witness, thereby denying a meaningful and timely…
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Mr. Trendafilov was present when Sergeant Harris read the implied consent warning to Petitioner and he authored the two Breath Alcohol Test Affidavits which were admitted into evidence. Further, Mr. Trendafilov could have testified as to how the notation "not a refusal" got onto one of the affidavits and what the notation meant.”
Court's reasoning establishing why the breath test technician was a critical witness contrary to the hearing officer's determination
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn May 26, 2007, police officers observed Petitioner's vehicle drifting between lanes and conducted a traffic stop, observing bloodshot and glassy eye…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Standard Of Review For Administrative Decisions cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
Petitioner Crystal Cumberledge timely filed this petition seeking certiorari review of the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles’ (Department) Final Order of License Suspension, sustaining the suspension of her driver’s license pursuant to section 322.2615, Florida Statutes. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to section 322.2615, Florida Statutes, and Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.030(c)(1)(C). We dispense with oral argument pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.320. On May 26, 2007, Lieutenant Schardine of the Maitland Police Department observed a vehicle drifting between lanes and contacted Sergeant Harris of the Maitland Police Department to conduct a traffic stop. Sergeant Harris conducted the traffic stop and identified Petitioner as the driver of the vehicle. Sergeant Harris observed that Petitioner’s eyes were bloodshot and glassy. Sergeant Harris also observed the strong odor of alcohol on Petitioner’s breath. Based on Petitioner’s performance on the field sobriety exercises, Petitioner was arrested and read the implied consent warning. Petitioner refused to submit to a breath-alcohol test and the Department suspended her driving privileges. Petitioner requested and was granted a formal review hearing pursuant to section 322.2615, Florida Statutes. When Petitioner attempted service on Mr. Trendafilov, the breath test technician, on June 25, 2007, the Orange County Sheriff’s Office refused to accept service of the subpoena. The Affidavit of Non-Service dated June 26, 2007, states that the “deputy will be on vacation on that day.”1
At the July 10, 2007 formal review hearing, Petitioner was represented by counsel and Lieutenant Schardine and Sergeant Harris testified. Petitioner moved to invalidate the suspension due to the refusal of the Sheriff’s Office to accept the subpoena for Mr. Trendafilov. The hearing officer denied the motion. Instead, the hearing officer offered to continue the hearing without continuing Petitioner’s temporary work permit but Petitioner declined. On July 10, 2007, the hearing officer entered an order sustaining the suspension of Petitioner’s driver’s license. The hearing officer also denied Petitioner’s motion to invalidate the suspension because the hearing officer did not deem Mr. Trendafilov to be a “critical witness.” Petitioner timely seeks certiorari review by this Court.
This Court finds that the hearing officer was incorrect about the importance of Mr. Trendafilov as a witness. Mr. Trendafilov was present when Sergeant Harris read the implied consent warning to Petitioner and he authored the two Breath Alcohol Test Affidavits which were admitted into evidence. Further, Mr. Trendafilov could have testified as to how the notation “not a refusal” got onto one of the affidavits and what the notation meant.
We conclude that the actions of the hearing officer and the Sheriff’s Office denied Petitioner due process of law. See Curle v. Dep’t of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles, 13 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 676a (Fla. 9th Cir. Ct. Jan. 17, 2006)(failure of the sheriff’s office to accept service of subpoena denied petitioner due process right to meaningful and timely hearing); Homer v. Dep’t of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles, 10 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 275a (Fla. 4th Cir. Ct. March 20, 2003); Estraviz v. Dep’t of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles, 4 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 813a (Fla. 4th Cir. Ct. July 15, 1997).
Ordinarily, the disposition of this case would be to grant the petition in part, quash the hearing officer’s final order, and direct the balance of hearing to be reset. However, due to the arbitrary actions of the Sheriff’s Office and the hearing officer and the delay by this Court in reaching this case for decision, none of which was the fault of Petitioner or her counsel, and the indirect penalty imposed on Petitioner by the one year license suspension and attorney’s fees and costs she paid, we have decided that in the interests of justice we should grant the exact relief Petitioner requests.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Petition for Writ of Certiorari is GRANTED; the hearing officer’s Final Order of License Suspension is QUASHED; and the Department is directed to reinstate Petitioner’s driving privilege.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Orlando, Orange County, Florida, this _7th___
day of ________January_________, 2010.
______/S/___________________________ ROM W. POWELL Senior Judge
_________/S/________________________ ______/S/___________________________ JENIFER M. DAVIS
ALICE L. BLACKWELL Circuit Court Judge
Circuit Court Judge
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing order was furnished via U.S. mail on this 8th day of January , 2010, to the following: William R. Ponall, Esquire, Post Office Box 2728, Winter Park, Florida 32790-2728 and Heather Rose Cramer, Assistant General Counsel, DHSMV-Legal Office, 6081 Lake Worth Road, Suite 230, Lake Worth, FL 33467.
_____/S/_____________________________
Judicial Assistant
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- City OF Deerfield Beach v. Vaillant, 419 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 1982)
- Dep't of Hwy. Safety & Motor Vehicles v. Allen, 539 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)