concurring: I concur in the scholarly opinion written by our beloved and illustrious Chief Justice, who has served the State so long and so ably to the admiration and satisfaction of all our people. I have known him all my life.
I agree with the statement that a plea of nolo contendere cannot be used in a subsequent proceeding in a different forum, and that such a *197plea was not competent in this proceeding under G.S. 20-16 as an admission of guilt, nor should it be held to sustain the ruling of the respondent. However, a plea of nolo contendere “is equivalent to a plea of guilty in so far as it gives the court tbe power to punish. It seems to be universally held that when the plea is accepted by the court, sentence is imposed upon a plea of guilty.” In re Stiers, 204 N.C. 48, 167 S.E. 382.
G.S. 20-24, subsection (a), provides that whenever any person is convicted of any offense for which this article makes mandatory the revocation of the license of such person by the Department of Motor Yehicles, the court in which such conviction is had shall require the surrender to it of the license then held by the person so convicted, and the court shall forward the same together with a record of such conviction to the Department.
G.S. 20-17, which is captioned “Mandatory Eevocation of License by Department,” states that the Department shall forthwith revoke the license of a person upon receipt of a record of such person’s conviction, when such conviction has become final, for driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor.
All the authorities agree that when a plea of nolo contendere is accepted by the court, sentence is imposed as upon a plea of guilty by the court accepting the plea. Mandatory revocation of license is part of the punishment for driving an automobile while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. When the court in Pasquotank County accepted the defendant’s plea of nolo contendere, G.S. 20-24, subsection (a), required it to take up the license of the petitioner and to forward the same together with a record of the plea to the Department. Upon receipt of such license and record by the Department, G.S. 20-17 requires a mandatory revocation of the defendant’s license. Such mandatory revocation by the Department seems to me to be as much the performance of a ministerial duty in the petitioner’s case in Pasquotank County, as the Clerk of the Court in Pasquotank County entering the judgment of the court in the case in the Minutes of that Court. I think it is the same case, the same proceeding, the same forum.
Therefore, in my opinion, it is the duty of the Department now to revoke the petitioner’s license under G.S. 20-17; and under said statute to revoke the licenses of all persons who have entered pleas of nolo con-tendere to a charge of driving an automobile while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, upon receipt of a record from a court in the State showing such a plea was entered.