Opinion ID: 2145078
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Valid Suspension of License

Text: Appellant contests the validity of the suspension of his license by claiming that no notice of suspension was mailed to his last known address. Appellant argues that the record contains no evidence that he lived at either of the addresses, listed in his driving record, to which the Bureau mailed notice. The trial judge found there was sufficient evidence that, 1) at the time of the suspension, Appellant lived at one of the addresses to which notice was mailed, 2) Appellant failed to keep the Bureau advised of his address, and 3) the Bureau made every effort to notify Appellant at the available addresses. We find that whether or not Appellant lived at one of the addresses to which the Bureau sent notice, the record contains sufficient evidence that the Bureau followed the proper procedure to validly suspend Appellant's license. If there is no valid suspension, then a driver cannot lawfully be convicted of Operating a Motor Vehicle After License Suspended as an Habitual Traffic Violator. Brown, 677 N.E.2d at 519. To ensure a valid suspension, the Bureau must send notice to the driver's last known address. Id. Proof of mailing is an evidentiary prerequisite to establishing that the suspension is valid ... Collins v. State, 567 N.E.2d 798, 800 (Ind. 1991). In Brown we held that: The Bureau may rely on the address which was last provided by the driver. It has no obligation to search through its files and surmise, based on papers therein, that a driver has a new address. Rather, the driver is required to provide it with an updated address. If the driver has not, the Bureau may assume the address last given is the correct address to which to send a notice. Brown, 677 N.E.2d at 519. The record contains sufficient evidence that Appellant's license was validly suspended. As an Indiana resident driving on Indiana's roads on July 31, 1989, Appellant was required to notify the Bureau of his current address. I.C. §§ 9-24-1-1, 9-24-13-4(1). Also, as a holder of an Indiana identification card, Appellant was required to inform the Bureau of his current address. [1] I.C. § 9-24-16-7. Regardless of where Appellant actually lived, he failed to keep the Bureau informed of his current address. On November 22, 1989, the Bureau made every effort to notify Appellant of the suspension of his license by mailing notice to the two addresses listed in Appellant's official driving record. [2] Appellant's driving record contains proof that the notice of suspension was mailed to these two different addresses. [3] This is sufficient evidence upon which the judge could find that the Bureau met the requirement of mailing notice to the last known address.