DHSMV
v.
CRITCHFIELD
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Petitioner Johnson sought certiorari review of the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles' denial of his hardship license application. The court affirmed the Department's decision, finding that although a constitutional defect in the relevant statute had created a window for hardship license eligibility, that window closed when the defect was cured through legislative reenactment on July 1, 2003, and Johnson did not apply until September 2006.
The court held that while Critchfield did create a temporary window during which drivers with four DUI convictions could request hardship licenses, that window closed on July 1, 2003, when the Legislature cured the constitutional defect and revived chapter 98-223. Johnson's failure to apply until September 2006 placed him outside this window, making the Department's denial decision consistent with the essential requirements of law.
[1] Judicial review of an administrative agency decision is governed by a three-part standard: whether procedural due process was accorded, whether the essential requirements…
[2] A reviewing court's function is not to reweigh evidence or make new factual findings when reviewing an administrative decision.
Previewing 2 of 6 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“It is neither the function nor the prerogative of a circuit judge to reweigh evidence and make findings [of fact] when [undertaking] a review of a decision of an administrative forum.”
Establishes the standard of review: courts do not reweigh evidence but review whether procedural due process was accorded, essential requirements of law were observed, and the decision was supported by competent substantial evidence.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDavid Johnson applied for a hardship license on September 8, 2006, after his driver's license had been revoked due to four DUI convictions. The Depart…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Statutory Revival cases and more on FLexlaw
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND
FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA
DAVID A. JOHNSON,
CASE NO.: 2006-CA-9177-O
WRIT NO.: 06-83
Petitioner,
v. STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR
VEHICLES,
Respondent. _______________________________________/
Petition for Writ of Certiorari from the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, M. Varnadore, Hearing Officer. William R. Ponall, Esquire, for Petitioner. Heather Rose Cramer, Assistant General Counsel, for Respondent.
Before MACKINNON, J. KEST, and EVANS, J.J.
PER CURIAM.
FINAL ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
Petitioner David A. Johnson timely filed this petition seeking certiorari review of the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles’ (the Department) final order denying his request for a hardship license. This Court has jurisdiction. 322.31, Fla. Stat. (2006); Fla. R. App. P. 9.030(c)(3); 9.100.
In Critchfield, the Supreme Court of Florida determined that chapter 98-223, which created section 322.28, Florida Statutes, and amended section 322.271(4), Florida Statutes, violated the single subject rule. 842 So. 2d at 785. This decision became final on June 11, 2003. Id. at 782. As a result of this ruling, the statutes as they existed before the amendments were reinstated until the defect was cured. Jackson v. Dep’t of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles, 848 So. 2d 1165 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). Prior to chapter 98-223, a driver whose license had been revoked due to four DUI convictions could request a hardship license after the expiration of five years after the date of revocation. Lescher v. Dep’t of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles, 985 So. 2d 1078 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). However, chapter 98-223 eliminated that language. Id. On May 21, 2003, the Legislature cured the defect when it readopted the 2002 statutes through House Bill 1017. Mullinix v. Dep’t of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles, 11 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1037a (Fla. 1st Cir. Ct. Sept.3, 2004). The effective date of the readoption of the 2002 statutes was July 1, 2003. Id. As a result, chapter 98-223 was revived and operated as good law beginning July 1, 2003 and thus, it is no longer subject to challenge. Id.; see also State v. Johnson, 616 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1993) (finding that once an invalid law is reenacted, it is no longer subject to the challenge that it violates the single-subject rule).
As of July 1, 2003, section 322.28(2)(e), requires the Department to permanently revoke the driver’s license of a person who has four convictions for DUI. It further provides that “[n]o driver’s license or driving privilege may be issued or granted to any
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers, at Orlando, Orange County, Florida on this the __22__ day of ________May______________, 2009.
_/S/__________________________
CYNTHIA Z. MACKINNON
Circuit Judge
_/S/__________________________
_/S/__________________________ JOHN MARSHALL KEST
ROBERT M. EVANS
Circuit Judge
Circuit Judge
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Order has been furnished via U.S. mail to: William R. Ponall, Esq., PO Box 2728, Winter Park, FL 32790-2728 and Heather Rose Cramer, Assistant General Counsel, Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, PO Box 540609, Lake Worth, Florida 33454-0609 on the ___26___ day of______May____________, 2009.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- City OF Deerfield Beach v. Vaillant, 419 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 1982)
- State v. Johnson, 616 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1993)
- Dep't of Hwy. Safety & Motor Vehicles v. Allen, 539 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)
- Fla. Dep't of Hwy. Safety & Motor Vehicles v. Critchfield, 842 So. 2d 782 (Fla. 2003)
- Lescher v. Fla. Dep't of Hwy. Safety & Motor Vehicles, 985 So. 2d 1078 (Fla. 2008)
- Jackson v. Dep't of Hwy. Safety & Motor Vehicles, 848 So. 2d 1165 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)