DWI: Preliminary Breath Tests are admissible in an MVA License Suspension Hearing

Preliminary Breath Test Results – Admissibility in Administrative Proceeding

Case: Motor Vehicle Administration v. Weller, 390 Md. 115 (2005).

Decision: A State statute prohibiting the admission of evidence of a preliminary breath test result in any court or civil action does not apply to an administrative hearing.

Background and Summary: On May 16, 2004, Steven Weller was detained by a police officer on suspicion of driving while under the influence of alcohol. Mr. Weller failed the field sobriety tests, and a preliminary breath test indicated a blood alcohol concentration of 0.16. He refused to take a chemical breath test, which resulted in an administrative order to suspend his driver’s license, which he contested at an administrative hearing.

The results of the preliminary breath test were introduced as evidence at the administrative hearing, and the administrative law judge found that Mr. Weller had been driving while under the influence of alcohol and that his license had been suspended eight years previously for refusing to take a chemical test. The administrative law judge stated she was concerned about the dangerousness of the driving and the amount of alcohol that appeared to have been ingested and that his latest alcohol treatment evaluation may not have included complete information about earlier problems with drinking and driving. Accordingly, the administrative law judge suspended Mr. Weller’s driver’s license for one year.

Mr. Weller sought judicial review by a circuit court. The circuit court held that the results of the preliminary breath test were inadmissible at the administrative hearing and found that the administrative decision was arbitrary and capricious. The court issued an order reversing the decision of the administrative law judge and vacating the license suspension. The Motor Vehicle Administration filed a writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals, which agreed to hear the case.

The court found that, while State law prohibits the admission of evidence relating to a preliminary breath test in any court or civil action, an administrative hearing is not a court or civil action. The court noted that the definition of a “court” under State law does not include an administrative hearing. The court also found that an administrative hearing falls outside the scope of a “civil action.” The court also noted that administrative hearings are agency proceedings, which are regarded as more informal and not bound by the technical rules of evidence.

The Court of Appeals determined that the circuit court improperly substituted its judgment for that of the Motor Vehicle Administration. The court stated that a reviewing court should defer to an agency’s interpretation of the facts if the record supports them. The court found that the administrative law judge did give proper consideration to the issues raised and properly exercised discretion in suspending the driver’s license. Last, but not least, the finding was that there was no indication that the administrative law judge acted illegally or in an arbitrary or capricious manner and remanded the case to the circuit court to reinstate the driver’s license suspension.