Court Opinion

ID: 9821422
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 08:05:06.475834+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:38:51.027145
License: Public Domain

ROBB, Judge,
concurring.
[1] I concur in the majority opinion. I write separately only to note the inconsistent treatment of those who currently hold CDLs and those who do not (but could in the future). As the majority notes, allowing an individual to surrender her CDL, avoid conviction by completing a diversion program, and then return to driving professionally with no record of the offense is “precisely what the anti-masking law is designed to prevent.” Slip op. at ¶ 18. But if an individual does not hold a CDL at the time of the offense, that individual can participate in a diversion program and later drive professionally with no record of the offense. See 49 C.F.R. § 384.225(a)(1) (requiring each state to maintain as part of the CDLIS driver record of each CDL holder “[a]ll convictions, disqualifications and other licensing actions for violations of any State or local law relating to motor vehicle traffic control (other than parking, vehicle weight, or vehicle defect violations) committed in any type of vehicle”). In light of the purpose of the Motor Carrier Safety Improvement Act, ie. “to reduce the number and severity of accidents involving commercial motor vehicles,” slip op. at ¶ 14, I find it difficult to justify this inconsistency.