Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles v. Corcoran, 133 So.3d 616 (2014)

Driver sought certiorari review of administrative suspension of his driver’s license. The Circuit Court, Orange County, granted petition and quashed suspension order. Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles petitioned for certiorari review. The District Court of Appeal held that: [1] certiorari would not lie to permanently invalidate suspension of driver’s license, and [2] proper remedy for any due process violation inherent in failure of subpoenaed witness to appear at suspension hearing was remand for new hearing. Petition granted; order of circuit court quashed.

Arenas v. Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, 90 So.3d 828 (2012)

Driver filed petition for writ of certiorari, challenging decision of the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, suspending his license based on his refusal to submit to a breath test upon being arrested for driving under the influence of an alcoholic beverage (DUI). The Twentieth Judicial Court, Lee County, denied petition. Driver filed petition for writ of certiorari. The District Court of Appeal held that: [1] a driver’s license suspension can be the result of a refusal to take a breath test if the refusal is incident to a lawful arrest; [2] driver was entitled to an opportunity to challenge whether the refusal was incident to a lawful arrest; and [3] case would be remanded to the circuit court to determine the mechanism by which the lawfulness of driver’s arrest would be decided. Petition granted.

Nader v. Florida Dept. of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, 87 So.3d 712 (2012)

Driver who refused to take breath test after being arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) filed petition for writ of certiorari, challenging order of the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles suspending her driver’s licenses pursuant to the implied consent law. The Circuit Court, Hillsborough County, granted petition. Department sought certiorari review. The District Court of Appeal, 4 So.3d 705, granted petitions, quashed orders and certified questions as matters of great public importance. The Supreme Court held that: [1] request that driver submit to a test of her “breath, blood, or urine” did not mislead driver into thinking that she was required to submit to a test more invasive than the breath test authorized by statute, disapproving State Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles v. Clark, 974 So.2d 416; [2] district court of appeal was authorized to grant second-tier certiorari relief to quash a circuit court decision that obeyed the controlling precedent of another district court, but in doing so, disobeyed the plain language of the statute, resulting in a miscarriage of justice. Questions answered.

Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles v. Cherry, 91 So.3d 849 (2011)

Motorist sought first-tier certiorari review of hearing officer’s order affirming the suspension of her driver’s license. The Circuit Court, Orange County, acting in its appellate capacity, granted motorist’s first-tier certiorari petition. The Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles sought second-tier certiorari review. The District Court of Appeal held that, because neither of motorist’s breath samples met the minimum requirements for volume, neither sample was reliable, and neither was valid, and as such, motorist refused to submit to a breath test, such that her right to seek an independent blood test did not arise. Quashed.

State, Dept. of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles v. Edenfield, 58 So.3d 904 (2011)

Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles filed petition for writ of certiorari, seeking review of an order of the Circuit Court, sitting in its appellate capacity, overturning the administrative suspension of motorist’s driver’s license for driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI). The District Court of Appeal held that circuit court did not violate a clearly established principle of law by deciding that motorist was denied due process when inspector of breath machines was allowed to testify telephonically. Petition denied.

State, Dept. of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles v. Freeman, 63 So.3d 23 (2011)

Driver, who refused to take breath test after being arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI), sought review of suspension of his driver’s license. The Circuit Court, Miami–Dade County, William Johnson, Marcia Cabellero, and Gladys Perez, JJ., quashed order. The Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles petitioned for a writ of certiorari. The District Court of Appeal held that: [1] second-tier certiorari review would be granted, and [2] warning to driver of the consequences of refusing to submit to a test of their “breath, blood, or urine” was valid. Petition granted.

Florida Dept. of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles v. Hernandez, 74 So.3d 1070 (2011)

In separate proceedings, motorists sought certiorari review of administrative suspension of their driver’s licenses for refusal to submit to breath tests. In the first case, the Circuit Court denied the petition. Motorist sought certiorari review. The District Court of Appeal, First District, 976 So.2d 1109, granted petition, finding that the hearing officer had the authority to consider the legality of motorist’s arrest, and certified the question as one of great public importance. In the second case, the Circuit Court, Polk County, denied the petition. Motorist sought certiorari review. The District Court of Appeal, Second District, 2 So.3d 988, denied petition and certified conflict. The Supreme Court held that: [1] a driver’s license cannot be suspended for refusal to submit to a breath test if the refusal was not incident to a lawful arrest, and [2] hearing officer’s scope of review includes review of whether the refusal was incident to a lawful arrest. Decision of the Second District quashed; decision of the First District approved.

Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles v. Icaza, 37 So.3d 309 (2010)

Driver sought certiorari review of driver’s license suspension order. The Circuit Court, Orange County, acting in its appellate capacity, quashed the suspension order, and Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles petitioned for writ of certiorari. The District Court of Appeal held that Circuit Court’s refusal to allow remand to hearing officer to make determination regarding lawfulness of arrest deprived Department of procedural due process.
Writ granted, mandate stayed.

State, Dept. of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles v. Trauth, 41 So.3d 916 (2010)

Motorists whose driver’s licenses were administratively suspended following their arrests for suspected driving under the influence (DUI), but who prevailed on appeal from the suspensions due to the use of improper breath or blood test consent forms or warnings, moved for awards of attorney fees and costs. The Circuit Court, Miami–Dade County, Appellate Division, awarded fees to two of the motorists. Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles appealed, and the District Court of Appeal, 971 So.2d 906, reversed and remanded due to the absence of a substantive basis for the awards. After remand, the Circuit Court awarded attorney fees and costs to all three motorists. Department appealed, and the appeals were consolidated. The District Court of Appeal held that circuit court lacked inherent authority to award attorney fees and costs. Reversed with directions.

McIntyre v. Seminole County School Bd., 779 So.2d 639 (Ct. App. Fla. 2001)

An area transportation manager who supervised school bus drivers tested positive for drugs but did not violate federal regulations prohibiting persons who must hold a commercial driver’s license (CDL) from operating a commercial vehicle while under the influence of controlled substances because manager’s job description stated that a CDL was “preferred” but not required, and job description did not indicate that manager operated a school bus or other commercial vehicle but that he performed managerial and supervisory functions.