suspended pursuant to section five a one point one may not be convicted driving on a suspended license the law has always been that one cannot violate the order of a court or an authorized here the defendant was given notice that his license would be suspended as of october eleventh two thousand and nine o'clock or eleven came and went without that changing his license was suspended as of october eleventh two only answer that matters for the criminal driving while suspended statute the statute prohibits driving quote at the time and quote that one's license is suspended october suspension and that that is for good reason beyond the broad policy reason that we do not encourage self help and encourage following the law but there's also the policy reason that the purpose of the suspension in the first place is to keep drunk drivers off the road and provide the public with protection from this dangerous class of drivers in retrospect in recognition of the fact that the criminal process i necessarily deliberately paced the legislature saw fit to provide a shorter term immediate protection in the form of this statutory summary suspension which is a civil remedial  sanction which takes drivers off the road much more quickly within forty six date on the forty six day rather from the notice and there's simply no way to keep drivers off the road with  civil sanction if that sanction has no teeth if subsequently getting that suspension rescinded means that one cannot be prosecuted for violating the suspension and there's no reason to observe the suspension at all as long as one is confident that it will be suspended eventually there is no deterrent effect whatsoever it also creates the rather absurd result that one simply cannot know whether one's license is suspended if rescission orders have ultimately whether you're suspended depends on whether you're feeling lucky and people would submit that this is an absurd results construction of the statute that turns dirty harry's question into valid legal advice is or should be secretary of state secretary of state then takes that suspension off of the motorist driving record so that he wouldn't have a repeat offender complications for having prior suspensions or that i had the length of the suspension for example analogous situations of whether one can be resisting arrest because the arrest is it is improper even though the arresting officer is authorized to make that arrest or whether one can escape from jail even though the charges for which one is in jail ultimately found to be unfounded there is a serious interest in having people follow the orders of authorized agents and the fact that this statutory system provides a remedy and a procedure for challenging those suspensions even before they go into effect and in many cases although we can see that there will be some cases when one will not be able to get review of a suspension before it goes into effect in the case of the legislature intended for those suspension to be effective until such time as they are lifted as this court described to the process in the core we also point to the united states supreme court's analysis in to the public and they should not be permitted to have firearms and the fact that the conviction in lewis was found to be constitutionally infirm did not mean that the time in that case was able to possess a firearm without first addressing the disability of the conviction the same reasoning holds here the definition not be permitted to drive when there is an opportunity for him to address the disability the suspension  him from driving to do so would would prevent these suspensions from being an effective tool of legislative intent the purpose of this entire system is to keep drunk drivers off the road and it but the purpose is to keep drunk drivers off the road and the fact that the legislature has determined that this is a sufficiently compelling interest that it is worth occasionally having improperly imposed suspensions in effect for some period of possibly weeks is not unreasonable or a due process violation off the off the road david l it was record would show was driving down the road mining his own business and was erroneous when stopped by state police officer in subsequently found that the dealt with and all that but this let's just take a look at the ward were sent me in the legislature this i have been fortunate of been around since the sevent and back in the seventy's when we filed our arbutus ins to resend it stayed stayed there and so in eighty six everybody came to the table they met and the legislation that were under now was prompted and in that legislation it does say that it does not stay the proceedings but that's in that same meeting in that same obtuse surgeon of into days the secretary of state was pres and they chose to use this word percent in so why do we as counsel suggestion is why do we take a known principle of a term of art all of us india corporation and you had these contracts and either through a problem the contract from either mistake or fraud on the you had this theory this the argument when this came in i can't find i don't know anybody else that has side i don't really know what the discussion was on why they why they took that out but i don't think that they meant it to mean that er whatever the other case that went the other way that actually cited that provision of the code i mean that's that's what it that's the import of what we're going to do it's going to affect future cases very public policy that you make absolutely and then he went on to say he reaffirmed by saying how can we do this you must be the village and in the last part of his concurring opinion he says there's going to be a lot of facts of choices here and addition that all of these are other cases came particularly the best look at it from this way counsel in his original argument in the in the brief states that this case of elliott that the fist fifth district deviated from the other two districts and i realize the fifth district deviates sometimes but in this particular case they're correct but he says it also goes against  percent is perspective mean as it does the summer suspension but the i do case deals with the word fate take each other and they go into a perfect analysis as to when the court vacates this ruling on the summary suspension then if so facto automatically you don't need anything else you don't need further act by the b and most of these are britain on the uniform citation and if you do go the sixty days you've got the two weeks and if he tells me what do i do in the two weeks i think i am absolutely telling don't drive because you may right no no i don't know why he comes to you i mean when you tell him if we get this rescinded and if you're stopped during this period of time don't worry about it because the law is you're not go client if you use i was not driving under the influence of some are right ok i under yours under your situation if he takes the chance and if he determines on that that police officer had absolutely no reason if he compute this because it's all the summer suspension if you're going back to that day and you're determining that time frame if he says if his counsel says yes i'm feeling lucky and found that he's going to suffer consequences and if we subsequently do the veil then he does but in answer to your question is he more likely that's an individual choice i mean i don't i don't know i'm a risk taker so for such and if you a pot and he was not represented by counsel og found him guilty of this very very low class felony and he went along through the years and then that so it's a different facets to a ship on the resisting arrest i do take issue with him on a resisting arrest if it is an otherwise lawful arrest then you're right you because of a well order society a well ordered society that a knowledge is language and their meanings you you go along with the flow e q don't but let's say you have a police and in this situation let's take two people driving they're both driving they're doing the exact same thing as mr ellis they're there they're driving this trail it's license suspended the other person doing the exact same be aviary as mr elliot as not suspend charged but what is the difference the difference is that the government agency that allowed mr elliott to drop the secretary of subsequently made a decision that the initial decision to suspend his license was wrong and they entered this order of recession so then that makes his be a view at that time appropriate you could never make the behavior of the person resisting arrest appropriate and in the other and that which is that's that's the difference here is this agency that is what governs this behavior and this agency of knowledge is our legal principle of recession mr johnson let me ask you this when the  petition to rescind is allowed what is it other than than the benefit for the argument you're trying to make here ok we're somebody was charged with driving while suspended let's say that didn't happen what what other than the cleanup of the ruled that there's no probable cause for the stop and if there's any it's like a fruit of the poisonous tree they rule this should never have to happen so everything else that flows from that is so that i mean that's the benefit but is there any that he's the court briefly it is true that we're seeing is a term of art and it's a contract term of art and so is consideration but life would be a lot more confusing if consideration meant in the criminal context what it means and contract the chorus required to give consideration to a bunch of different factors it's not clear exactly what that would mean if one was using the contract will term of art consideration work and the same obtains here for ricin  that's likely one of the reasons this court in explaining how this scheme works use the word lift as a synonym for rescind and equally importantly drivers can follow it they know that their license is suspended when they're told your license is suspended a different in this case was told his license suspended as of october eleventh with a prospective leading he even knows that's correct my license is suspended as of october eleventh until such time as i get that suspension rescinded the retroactive reading doesn't give you a rule you can apply if you're told your license is suspended as of october eleventh and it may or may not be suspended depending on some future event the outcome of a future process and as counterpoint out of idle shows that process isn't simply the rescission hearing it may be subsequent appellate proceedings  finally counsel mention that if one is feeling lucky and he suffers the consequences if you if you pick the wrong if he was told you're suspended but there's a possibility that not suspend depending on the outcome of the future hearing feeling lucky and he guesses wrong and he suffers the consequences we would submit that it's the public that suffers the consequences the consequences of having a suspected drunk driver on the road and that's the whole purpose of the scheme is to keep this class of drivers off the road works as i understand it is the suspension takes effect forty six days after the arrest correct that's right the first forty five days the person that you want to keep off the road immediately following the dui charge is still lawfully allowed to drive correct that's true so how does that work with your argument well the legislature decided because driving privileges are a property right and we have it the defendants have due process rights you can't  simply strip this privilege of out of proceeding the legislature had to balance the protection for the public against the defendants due process rights and this is the balance they reached and certainly one could argue it would be if we had it going to affect fifteen days later there would be more protection less opportunity to challenge or thirty days but all of that sort of balancing is what is the legislatures in denver and they conducted it and this is what they arrived yet may i ask you the same question i asked mr anselmo's other than this scenario if we didn't have the driving while suspended were received and is allowed what benefit is there to the driver beyond apparently no two things one they don't have the problem with a future second suspension that would second driv longer have that suspension on the record as far as the secretary of state is concerned the question is really the separate inquiry of what happens if you violate a suspension before you get removed from your record in the same way that you can have a resisting arrest conviction without any other criminal record at all or an escape conviction but any other record and the other conviction that it's really a separate it's a separate charge it's a separate procedure council rates one thousand eighty three cases and that's i think relevant that there is if there is a a civil inquiry into the propriety of of an officer's actions for example and there's the criminal consequences of resisting those actions as they're being carried  out and you know you can't resist arrest even though the officer may subsequently have open the door for one thousand and three civil remedy the same would would hold here there may be civil remedies if officers are maliciously pulling people over and then picking on them where there's malicious prosecution that sort of thing but that doesn't excuse ignoring the the order of the secretary of state in order that sector it is authorized