Court Opinion

ID: 9534277
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 04:38:15.687558+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:30:09.161712
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE COOK, specially concurring: I disagree with the majority’s conclusion that the results of medical-personnel-directed testing under section 11 — 501.4 of the Vehicle Code (625 ILCS 5/11 — 501.4 (West 2006)) are not admissible in statutory-summary-suspension proceedings. 381 Ill. App. 3d at 947. As the majority points out, such results are admissible in DUI prosecutions. 381 Ill. App. 3d at 947. DUI convictions are admissible in mandatory revocation proceedings by the Secretary of State. 625 ILCS 5/6— 205(a)(2) (West 2006). If the Secretary of State is entitled to consider the DUI conviction, he is also entitled to consider the evidence on which that conviction is based. I recognize that a summary suspension will usually take place quickly, before there has been a DUI conviction. That is the whole purpose of the summary-suspension procedure. That is no reason, however, to bar the Secretary’s consideration of evidence admissible in DUI proceedings. The fact that section 11 — 501.4(a) of the Vehicle Code (625 ILCS 5/11 — 501.4(a) (West 2006)) does not explicitly state that the Secretary must be notified of medical-personnel-directed testing results is not significant. The statute makes no provision that the Secretary may not be notified of such testing. Explicit provisions for disclosure in some cases do not rule out the possibility of disclosure in other cases. Nevertheless, I agree with the majority that the fact that medical-personnel-directed testing has been performed does not prevent (1) an arresting officer from requesting that a driver submit to chemical testing under section 11 — 501.1(a) of the Vehicle Code (625 ILCS 5/11— 501(a) (West 2006)) or (2) the State from punishing the driver for refusing to submit to that testing under section 6 — 208.1 of the Vehicle Code (625 ILCS 5/6 — 208.1 (West 2006)). Because the chemical testing is more likely to produce quick results that may be acted on by the Secretary of State, medical-personnel-directed testing is not an alternative which may be used in place of chemical testing.