A Colorado Supreme Court order dealing with the exclusionary rule and driver license DMV
The Department of Revenue, through the Division of Motor Vehicles, revoked a driver’s license, following a hearing officer’s determination that the driver had driven a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol content in excess of the statutory maximum. The district court reversed, holding that the initial stop of the driver’s vehicle was not supported by reasonable suspicion. The court of appeals reversed the district court and held that the legality of the initial contact between the police and the driver was not relevant in the civil administrative proceeding to revoke the driver’s license. The court also held that the exclusionary rule did not apply to suppress evidence of the driver’s BAC. The supreme court holds that, under section 42-2-126, C.R.S. (2011), “probable cause” in the context of the driver’s license revocation statute, as it existed at the time of the hearing in this case, refers to the quantum and quality of evidence necessary for a law enforcement officer to issue a notice of driver’s license revocation, not whether the officer’s initial contact with the driver was lawful. The supreme court further holds that the exclusionary rule did not apply to suppress evidence of the driver’s BAC in the driver’s license revocation proceeding. Accordingly, the supreme court affirms the judgment of the court of appeals.
Appellant Brief on Whether an Illegal Stop Can Affect a License Revocation
Whether or not the exclusionary rule applies in driver’s license revocation proceedings, the express consent statute does not allow the Department of Revenue to revoke a driver’s license pursuant to section 42-2-126 on the basis of a search that itself is the product of an illegal stop and arrest. In this case we argued that, The court of appeals erred in holding that a driver cannot rely on the exclusionary rule to raise the illegality of initial police contact as a defense in a driver’s license revocation proceeding conducted pursuant to section Colorado Law,
Note statute has changed this since the appeal.
Reply re Motion for Attorney Fees and Costs
Reply re Motion for Attorney Fees and Costs
Motion for Attorney Fees and Costs
Motion for Attorney Fees and Costs
MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO SERVE COMPLAINT
MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO SERVE COMPLAINT
Letter to Client Regarding Fees
a quick simple letter to client explaining to them that the court has issued an order for the other party to pay attorney fee however client is still responsible for it
Declaration in Support of Attorney’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil
Template Document
Request for Attorney’s Fees and Costs Attachment
Request for Attorney’s Fees and Costs Attachment
Order to Pay Waived Court Fees and Costs (Superior Court)
Order to Pay Waived Court Fees and Costs (Superior Court)
Order After Hearing on Motion to Set Aside Order to Pay Waived Court Fees (Superior Court)
Order After Hearing on Motion to Set Aside Order to Pay Waived Court Fees (Superior Court)
Attorney’s Fees And Costs Order Attachment
Attorney’s Fees And Costs Order Attachment
Application to Set Aside Order to Pay Waived Court Fees – Attachment
Application to Set Aside Order to Pay Waived Court Fees – Attachment