STATE v CHRISTOPHERSON

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

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 , -vsR 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 : Decided: Filed: AI 3 - 7gq:: Clerk June 28, 1 9 8 5 A u g u s t 30, 1 9 3 5 Mr. Justice Frank B. Morrison, Jr., delivered the Opinion of the Court. Christopherson appealed the Department of Motor Vehicle'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. Bozeman Detention Center. Christopherson was taken to the 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. asked that a blood test be given. Christopherson 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 driver'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 license. 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 [Emphasis added. 1 subsection (5) . 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 given, either blood, breath, or t h e type of urine. When t e s t t o be 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. The p u r p o s e o f S 61-8-402, W e agree. 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 . provides that type chemical of the arresting officer test will be The s t a t u t e i s t o d e s i g n a t e which 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:

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.