Court Opinion

ID: 9619893
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 05:34:39.287449+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:04:45.408750
License: Public Domain

Schroeder, J.,
dissenting: There is a break in the chain of evidence necessary to sustain a conviction in this case.
The link necessary to establish that the appellant was operating his vehicle, while his operator’s license was suspended or revoked, was the “Order of Suspension of Privileges to Operate Motor Vehicle in Kansas,” dated April 12, 1960. This order suspended his privilege to operate motor vehicles in Kansas from March 14, 1960, *590and stated that his license could not be reinstated before “9-30-61.”
While a copy of this order was attached to the certificate of the Superintendent of the Motor Vehicle Department, it toas not certified as being one of the documents attached. As such, it was incompetent as evidence in the trial of the case over appellant’s objection.
The complaint was filed July 13, 1961, charging appellant with an offense on the 17th day of June, 1961. The letter of revocation (certified) shows only revocation for one year for driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor for conviction on September 30, 1959. The Abstract of Record of Conviction (certified) shows suspension of driver’s license for offense of “Driving while license Suspended & Revoked,” conviction 3-2-60, hearing 3-14-60, and sentence 3-28-60. No other material date is shown by this document. One year from 3-28-60 would be 3-28-61, long prior to the date of the alleged offense herein. (See, G. S. 1949, 8-256.) Thus, the order dated April 12, 1960, toas necessary in proof.
It is respectfully submitted that the judgment of conviction should be reversed and a new trial granted.