State v. Christopherson

No. 85-115 I N THE SUPREME COURT O F THE STATE O F MONTANA 1985 S T A T E O F MONTANA, P l a i n t i f f and R e s p o n d e n t , -vs- R I C K RAY CHRISTOPHERSON, D e f e n d a n t and A p p e l l a n t . A P P E A L PROM: D i s t r i c t C o u r t of t h e E i g h t e e n t h J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , I n and f o r t h e C o u n t y of G a l l a t i n , T h e H o n o r a b l e Joseph B. G a r y , Judge p r e s i d i n q . COUNSEL O F RECORD: For A p p e l l a n t : C o k & Wheat; E u l a C o m p t o n , Bozeman, Montana For R e s p o n d e n t : Mike Greely, Attorney General, Helena, Montana A. M i c h a e l S a l v a g n i , C o u n t y A t t o r n e y , B o z e m a n , Montana S u b m i t t e d on B r i e f s : June 28, 1 9 8 5 Decided: A u g u s t 30, 1 9 3 5 Filed: AI 3 - 7gq:: Clerk Mr. Justice Frank B. Morrison, Jr., delivered the Opinion of the Court. Christopherson appealed the Department of Motor Vehi- cle's suspension of his driver's license to the Eighteenth Judicial District Court in Gallatin County on the basis that the license should not have been suspended under S 61-8-402(3), MCA, since he did not refuse to submit to a chemical test of blood alcohol content. This is an appeal from the District Court's order denying his petition for reinstatement of his driver's license. Rick Christopherson is a 24-year-old Cut Bank rancher and part-time student at Montana State University. He was arrested, on December 21, 1984, for driving while under the influence of alcohol. Christopherson was taken to the Bozeman Detention Center. He was informed of the Montana Consent Law in a reading, by the arresting officer, of a Consent Law form used by the City of Bozeman. Christopherson asked that a blood test be given. He was informed that he did not have a choice and that a blood test would be given only if he first submitted to a breath test. Christopherson again asked and offered to pay for a blood test; he refused to take the breath test. His refusal was recorded as a refusal to submit to any test. His license was taken by the arresting officer and subsequently suspended, for ninety (90) days, by the Department of Motor Vehicles. Christopherson appeals the District Court's refusal to reinstate his driv- er's license presenting the following issue: Did the appellant's statement following his arrest for driving under the influence of alcohol that he would not submit to the designated breath test, but that he instead wanted a blood test, constitute a refusal under S 61-8-402, NCA? M o n t a n a ' s i m p l i e d c o n s e n t s t a t u t e S 6 1 - 8 - 4 0 2 ( 1 ) ( 3 ) , MCA, s t a t e s a s follows: 61-8-402. Chemical b l o o d , b r e a t h , o r u r i n e t e s t s . (1) Any p e r s o n who o p e r a t e s a motor v e h i c l e upon ways o f t h i s s t a t e open t o t h e p u b l i c s h a l l be deemed t o h a v e g i v e n c o n s e n t , s u b j e c t t o t h e p r o v i - s i o n s o f 61-8-401, t o a c h e m i c a l t e s t o f h i s b l o o d , b r e a t h , o r u r i n e f o r t h e purpose of determining t h e a l c o h o l i c c o n t e n t o f h i s b l o o d i f a r r e s t e d by a peace o f f i c e r f o r d r i v i n g o r i n a c t u a l physical. c o n t r o l o f a motor v e h i c l e w h i l e under t h e i n f l u - ence of alcohol. The t e s t s h a l l b e a d m i n i s t e r e d a t t h e d i r e c t i o n of a peace o f f i c e r having reasonable g r o u n d s t o b e l i e v e t h e p e r s o n t o h a v e been d r i v i n g o r i n a c t u a l p h y s i c a l c o n t r o l o f a motor v e h i c l e upon ways o f t h i s s t a t e open to t h e p u b l i c w h i l e u n d e r t h e i n f l u e n c e o f a-lcohol . he a r r e s t i n g o f f i c e r mav d e s i a n a t e which one o f t h e a f o r e s a i d t e s t s -- b e a d m i n i s t e r e d . shall ( 3 ) I f a r e s i d e n t d r i v e r u n d e r a r r e s t r e f u s e s upon t h e r e q u e s t o f a peace o f f i c e r t o submit t o a chemica 1 t e s t d e s i g n a t e d & t h e a r r e s t i n g o f f i c e r a s p r o v i d e d i n s u b s e c t i o n (1) of t h i s s e c t i o n , none s h a l l be g i v e n , b u t t h e o f f i c e r s h a l l , on b e h a l f of t h e d i v i s i o n , i m m e d i a t e l y s e i z e h i s d r i v e r ' s li- cense. The p e a c e o f f i c e r s h a l l f o r w a r d t h e l i c e n s e t o t h e d i v i s i o n , a l o n g w i t h a sworn r e p o r t t h a t h e had r e a s o n a b l e g r o u n d s t o b e l i e v e t h e a r r e s t e d p e r s o n had been d r i v i n g o r was i n a c t u a l p h y s i c a l c o n t r o l o f a motor v e h i c l e upon ways o f t h i s s t a t e open t o t h e p u b l i c , w h i l e u n d e r t h e i n f l u e n c e o f a l c o h o l and t h a t t h e p e r s o n had r e f u s e d t o s u b m i t t o t h e t e s t upon t h e r e q u e s t o f t h e p e a c e o f f i c e r . Upon r e c e i p t o f t h e r e p o r t , t h e d i v i s i o n s h a l l suspend t h e l i c e n s e f o r t h e p e r i o d provided i n subsection (5) . [Emphasis added. 1 Law e n f o r c e m e n t o f f i c i a l s h a v e i n t e r p r e t e d t h i s s t a t u t e t o require police determination of t h e type of t e s t t o be given, either blood, breath, or urine. When the officer d e s i g n a t e s a t e s t and t h e d r i v e r r e f u s e s t h a t t e s t b u t a s k s f o r another type of test, the o f f i c e r takes t h a t a s a refusal t o s u b m i t t o a c h e m i c a l t e s t and s e i z e s t h e d r i v e r ' s l i c e n s e p u r s u a n t t o S 61-8-402(3), MCA. W e agree. The p u r p o s e o f S 61-8-402, MCA, i s t o encourage a person a r r e s t e d f o r D U I t o submit t o a chemical t e s t . The s t a t u t e provides that the arresting officer i s t o d e s i g n a t e which type of chemical test will be administered. The a r r e s t e d p e r s o n may t a k e t h e d e s i g n a t e d t e s t o r r e f u s e i t , b u t i f he w i l l n o t t a k e t h e t e s t d e s i g n a t e d by t h e o f f i c e r , h i s d r i v - e r ' s license s h a l l be suspended. The l a n g u a g e o f t h e s t a t u t e makes it c l e a r t h a t it i s t h e r e f u s a l t o t a k e t h e t e s t d e s i g - nated 9 t h e a r r e s t i n g o f f i c e r t h a t t r i g g e r s t h e suspension, n o t t h e r e f u s a l t o t a k e any t e s t w h a t s o e v e r . If the arrested person chooses t o t a k e a chemical t e s t o t h e r than t h e test designated by the a r r e s t i n g o f f i c e r and w i l l not take the d e s i g n a t e d t e s t , i t i s s t i l l a r e f u s a l f o r which h i s d r i v e r ' s l i c e n s e w i l l be suspended. The a p p e l l a n t ' s d r i v e r ' s l i c e n s e was p r o p e r l y suspended and t h e D i s t r i c t Court i s affirmed. W e concur: