Opinion ID: 2182260
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: continuing suspension

Text: Bettenhausen challenged the validity of continued suspension for failure to take inpatient treatment recommended by an addiction counselor. In State v. Larson, 419 N.W.2d 897, 898 (N.D.1988) we said: In State v. Mehlhoff, 318 N.W.2d 314 (N.D.1982), we held that the validity of a driver's license suspension may not be collaterally attacked at a trial for driving under suspension (DUS). We concluded that the proper time to challenge the validity of a driver's license suspension is at a hearing on the suspension. Because Bettenhausen did not request a hearing on the administrative suspension of his license, we conclude that he may not challenge that suspension in his trial for driving under suspension. The State asserts that the trial court incorrectly ruled that the Division did not reduce Bettenhausen's accumulated points as required by law and that Bettenhausen's license was not validly under suspension in July 1989. We agree. The relevant part of NDCC 39-06.1-10(2) says: If the licensing authority confirms, after hearing or opportunity for hearing, that the licensee's driving record has an accumulated point total of twelve or more points, the licensing authority shall suspend his operator's license according to the following schedule: Period of Suspension: Accumulated Point Total: a. Twelve 7 days b. Thirteen and above 7 days for each point over eleven The relevant part of NDCC 39-06.1-12 says: When a licensee completes a period of suspension ordered pursuant to section 39-06.1-10 or as ordered or recommended by a court of competent jurisdiction, the licensing authority shall reduce the point total shown on his driving record to eleven points. And, NDCC 39-06.1-13(1) says: The licensing authority shall reduce the point total shown on any licensee's driving record by one point for each three-month period during which no points are recorded against his driving record for a moving violation or a violation listed in paragraphs 13 through 18 of subdivision a of subsection 3 of section 39-06.1-10. The three-month period must be calculated from the date of entry of the last points against that licensee's driving record. These sections outline relevant elements of the point system that the Division must apply in suspending an operator's license. Bettenhausen's driving record showed that 14 points were still assessed against it on July 21, 1989, and that his license was still suspended. Bettenhausen argued that his suspension would have been completed on or about January 19, 1987, that his driving record should then have shown 11 points, and that his driving record as of July 21, 1989, should have shown, at the most, one point against it. A Division employee testified: We do not reduce the points for serving the suspension day period until after the driving privileges have been reinstated. When his driving privileges are reinstated, he would be given thirteen points credit because he has served that 91 days and since at this point he only has twelve points, he would be down to zero points. The trial court ruled that the Division's failure to reduce the number of points against Bettenhausen's license to eleven after his license had been suspended for 91 days was contrary to law. Once suspended, an operator's license remains suspended until reinstated. See State v. Brude, 222 N.W.2d 296, 297-298 (N.D.1974): The phrase period of revocation, as used in Chapter 39-06 of the North Dakota Century Code, means a period during which driving privileges are revoked and no application for a reinstatement may be made. Revocation will, however, continue after this period if the license is not reinstated by the licensing authority. If the individual driver wishes the revocation terminated he must make application and satisfy the licensing authority as to his qualification to drive a motor vehicle on our highways. See Section 39-06-36, N.D.C.C. See also, State v. Mische, 448 N.W.2d 412, 414 (N.D.1989) [When the period of suspension expires, an operator's license may not be returned or an operator's driving privileges may not be reinstated until the operator pays a $25 reinstatement fee.]; State v. Moore, 341 N.W.2d 373, 375 (N.D. 1983) [revocation continues until the driver is able to apply for a new license.]. A person whose license has been suspended is not privileged to drive until he meets reinstatement requirements and regains his operator's license. Sections 39-06-35, 39-06.1-10(3.1)(a), and 39-16.1-07(2) of the North Dakota Century Code spell out requirements for reinstatement of a suspended operator's license. When the period of suspension imposed under this title ceases, the operator's license or driving privilege that has been suspended may not be returned or reinstated, and remains under suspension, until the operator pays to the commissioner a reinstatement fee . . . and, if applicable, until the provisions of subsection 3.1 of section 39-06.1-10 have been complied with. NDCC 39-06-35. NDCC 39-06.1-10(3.1)(a) imposes an additional requirement for reinstatement when the suspension is for driving under the influence of intoxicating liquor: If the commissioner is informed by a court that a person has been convicted of violating section 39-08-01 or equivalent ordinance, the commissioner, subject to the offender's opportunity for hearing under subsection 1, may not restore the operator's license to the offender until the offender furnishes to the commissioner the written statement of the counselor or instructor of an appropriate licensed addiction treatment program that the offender does not require either an education or treatment program or that the offender has physically attended the prescribed program and has complied with the attendance rules. NDCC 39-16.1-07(2) requires that a person convicted of DUI may not have his operator's license restored until he has filed proof of financial responsibility. Thus, once suspended, an operator's license remains under suspension after the declared period of suspension and until the license is reinstated. Reinstatement of Bettenhausen's license requires (1) that he pay the reinstatement fee; (2) that, as NDCC 39-06.1-10(3.1)(a) requires, Bettenhausen furnish a written statement from a counselor or instructor of an appropriate licensed addiction treatment program that he either (i) does not need an education or treatment program or (ii) has physically attended the prescribed program and has complied with the attendance rules; and (3) that Bettenhausen prove financial responsibility. It is undisputed that Bettenhausen has not paid the reinstatement fee, has not furnished an addiction treatment statement, and has not submitted proof of financial responsibility. Accordingly, the Division did not err in failing to reduce the number of points against Bettenhausen's license to eleven after his license had been suspended for 91 days. His operator's license, therefore, remains under suspension.