Opinion ID: 2624992
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The DMV's Denial of an In-person Hearing Constituted a Due Process Violation.

Text: Arguing that credibility was crucial to the central issue in this case, whether he agreed to take the breath test, Whitesides contends that his license revocation should be reversed for failure to grant an in-person hearing. Without a chance to observe Whitesides's demeanor, he states, the hearing officer could not fairly and meaningfully assess his credibility. He contends that since his credibility was at issue in the hearing, the due process clause of the Alaska Constitution [5] affords him the right to present his testimony in person to the trier of fact. The standard of review applicable to this issue is de novo. [6] We apply the framework of Mathews v. Eldridge [7] when evaluating whether administrative proceedings satisfy due process. [8] We consider: First, the private interest that will be affected by the official action; second, the risk of an erroneous deprivation of such interest through the procedures used, and the probable value, if any, of additional or substitute procedural safeguards; and finally, the Government's interest, including the function involved and the fiscal and administrative burdens that the additional or substitute procedural requirement would entail.[ [9] ] We proceed to review these considerations in the context of this case.