Case Name: In the Matter of the Suspension of the Driving Privileges of CECIL IRWIN CARDWELL, Appellant, v. DRIVER AND MOTOR VEHICLE SERVICES BRANCH (DMV), Respondent
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 2001-10-31
Citations: 177 Or. App. 707
Docket Number: CCV 9903159; A107914
Parties: In the Matter of the Suspension of the Driving Privileges of CECIL IRWIN CARDWELL, Appellant, v. DRIVER AND MOTOR VEHICLE SERVICES BRANCH (DMV), Respondent.
Judges: Before Edmonds, Presiding Judge, and Armstrong and Kistler, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 177
Pages: 707–708

Head Matter:
Argued and submitted December 15, 2000,
affirmed October 31, 2001
In the Matter of the Suspension of the Driving Privileges of CECIL IRWIN CARDWELL, Appellant, v. DRIVER AND MOTOR VEHICLE SERVICES BRANCH (DMV), Respondent.
CCV 9903159; A107914
33 P3d 1068
Jon F. Strock argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant.
Christina M. Hutchins, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were Hardy Myers, Attorney General, and Michael D. Reynolds, Solicitor General.
Before Edmonds, Presiding Judge, and Armstrong and Kistler, Judges.
PER CURIAM

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
Petitioner appeals a circuit court judgment that affirmed a final order of the Driver and Motor Vehicles Services Branch of the Oregon Department of Transportation (DMV) that increased retroactively the period of revocation of his driving privileges from five to eight years, pursuant to ORS 809.410(1). Petitioner raises a number of challenges to the judgment, almost all of which we have already rejected in Mannelin v. DMV, 176 Or App 9, 31 P3d 438 (2001), and McNutt v. DMV, 176 Or App 171, 31 P3d 1087 (2001). The only argument that he raises that we have not previously addressed is that DMV erred by relying on the procedure specified in ORS 809.140(1)(a) to revoke his license. We reject that argument without discussion.
Affirmed.