Court Opinion

ID: 9675166
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 04:43:46.876354+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:15:42.547044
License: Public Domain

White, C.J.,
concurring.
I concur with the majority’s holding that a statute that authorizes a court to reduce a 15-year vehicle operator’s license revocation to time served is a commutation of a sentence, in violation of article n, § 1, of the Nebraska Constitution. However, I believe that in analyzing the punishing nature of a license revocation, it is time for this court to reexamine what exactly is being taken away from the person as a result of the license revocation.
Driver’s licenses historically have been referred to by this court as privileges. See, State v. Hansen, ante p. 177, 542 N.W.2d 424 (1996); State v. Green, 229 Neb. 493, 427 N.W.2d 304 (1988). This court’s continuous assertion that a driver’s license is a privilege is outmoded and, at best, inaccurate, if not incorrect. The U.S. Supreme Court has referred to an operator’s license, for procedural due process purposes, as an “entitlement, ” and not as a mere privilege that could be revoked by a state for cause. See Bell v. Burson, 402 U.S. 535, 91 S. Ct. 1586, 29 L. Ed. 2d 90 (1971). This court has acknowledged the U.S. Supreme Court’s classification in Bell by referring to the revocation of a license as the denial of an entitlement because it may result in a loss of livelihood to the licensee. See, Bosselman, Inc. v. State, 230 Neb. 471, 432 N.W.2d 226 (1988); State v. Michalski, 221 Neb. 380, 377 N.W.2d 510 (1985). Unfortunately, this court continuously reverts back to erroneously labeling driver’s licenses as privileges, as recently *269as this term. See Hansen, supra.
The facts of this case illustrate that the revocation of a license is not a mere denial of a privilege. Bainbridge operates a 500-acre farm in mral Nebraska. He stated that having no license severely inhibits his abilities to operate his farm and to carry out everyday activities. He indicates,
[i]t is ten miles to the nearest town. Whenever he transports commodities to market, whenever he needs food or supplies, whenever he needs repair parts for his equipment, whenever he needs anything whatsoever to maintain his business operation or to sustain his life, he must obtain transportation from one of his neighbors.
Brief for appellant at 16. This has been imposed on Bainbridge for 6 years of his life and is to continue for another 9 years. This 15-year revocation has resulted in a loss of livelihood for Bainbridge. In short, this revocation is more than a mere denial of a privilege.
A conclusion that a loss of one’s right to drive is to be analyzed under a denial-of-a-privilege type of analysis is a conclusion ignorant of the practical realities of driving in the State of Nebraska. Nebraska is the 15th-largest state in the United States, with a land area of 77,355 square miles. Nebraska Blue Book 1994-95 at 9. As it is a predominantly rural state, automobiles are essential to transportation. Furthermore, in the rural areas of the state, no mass transit system exists. These characteristics of our state reflect the critical role driving plays in a Nebraska resident’s day-to-day life.
In sum, the time is ripe for this court to reexamine its precedent finding operator’s licenses to be mere privileges. Until we undertake this task, the punishing effect of license revocations will remain unclear.