Case Name: Matthew WILSON, Respondent, v. DIRECTOR OF REVENUE, Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2005-05-31
Citations: 164 S.W.3d 142
Docket Number: No. ED 84333
Parties: Matthew WILSON, Respondent, v. DIRECTOR OF REVENUE, Appellant.
Judges: Before GEORGE W. DRAPER III, C.J., CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, J„ and GLENN A. NORTON, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 164
Pages: 142–142

Head Matter:
Matthew WILSON, Respondent, v. DIRECTOR OF REVENUE, Appellant.
No. ED 84333.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Five.
May 31, 2005.
James H. Klahr, Jefferson City, MO, for appellant.
Michael D. Lowry, Hillsboro, MO, for respondent.
Before GEORGE W. DRAPER III, C.J., CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, J„ and GLENN A. NORTON, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
The Director of Revenue (hereinafter, "Director") appeals from the trial court's judgment setting aside the one year suspension of Matthew L. Wilson's (hereinafter, "Driver") driving privileges and imposing a ninety day suspension for violation of Missouri's "Zero Tolerance Law." Director's sole point on appeal claims that the trial court erred in imposing a ninety day suspension because Driver's second notice of suspension prevented automatic expungement of Driver's first zero tolerance suspension under Section 302.545.2 RSMo (2000).
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. We find the trial court's judgment did not erroneously declare or apply the law. Knipp v. Director of Revenue, 984 S.W.2d 147, 151 (Mo.App. W.D.1998). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).