MICHAEL R NOVAK V SECRETARY OF STATE

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS MICHAEL R. NOVAK, UNPUBLISHED January 9, 1998 Petitioner-Appellee, v No. 199826 Allegan Circuit Court LC No. 96-019991 AL SECRETARY OF STATE, Respondent-Appellant. Before: MacKenzie, P.J., and Hood and Hoekstra, JJ. MEMORANDUM. Respondent appeals as of right from a circuit court order vacating respondent’s order suspending petitioner’s nonresident driving privileges for six months as a consequence of petitioner’s refusal to submit to a chemical test pursuant to the implied consent law. We reverse. This case is being decided without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E). A person who refuses to submit to a chemical test may request a hearing, which is limited to a determination of the following issues: (1) whether the peace officer had reasonable grounds to believe that the driver committed a crime described in MCL 257.625c(1); MSA 9.2325(3)(1); (2) whether the driver was arrested for the crime; (3) whether the driver unreasonably refused to submit to the test upon the officer’s request; and (4) whether the driver was advised of his or her rights concerning the chemical test as set forth in MCL 257.625a(6); MSA 9.2325(1)(6). MCL 257.625f(2) and (4); MSA 9.2325(6)(2) and (4); McMillan v Sec’y of State, 155 Mich App 399, 402; 399 NW2d 538 (1986). After the hearing, if the driver does not prevail, then the Secretary of State may suspend the driver’s nonresident operating privileges for six months. MCL 257.625f(7)(a); MSA 9.2325(6)(7)(a). Circuit Court review of the hearing officer’s determination is provided for by statute, but is limited to a review of the record prepared pursuant to § 625f to ascertain whether the hearing officer properly determined the issues enumerated in § 625f or whether a restricted license should be issued. MCL 257.323(4); MSA 9.2023(4); McMillan, supra, p 402. In the instant case, petitioner requested no hearing before a hearings officer and, therefore, no record was prepared pursuant to § 625f. In the absence of such a record, the circuit court lacked -1­ authority to review the order of suspension and to vacate respondent’s order of suspension by trial de novo. McMillan, supra, 403-404. In the absence of a hearing, the suspension of petitioner’s nonresident operating privileges was automatic. MCL 257.625f(1)(a); MSA 9.2325(6)(1)(a); McMillan, supra, p 404. We vacate the circuit court order and reinstate respondent’s order of suspension. We do not retain jurisdiction. /s/ Barbara B. MacKenzie /s/ Harold Hood /s/ Joel P. Hoekstra -2­

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.