Court Opinion

ID: 9858043
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 16:12:55.61941+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:01:29.672145
License: Public Domain

*374SNELL, Justice
(concurring specially).
Petitioner challenges the legality of the revocation of his driver’s license by claiming the arresting officer did not have reasonable grounds to believe that a violation of section 321.J.2 had occurred. That section prohibits operating a motor vehicle while having an alcohol concentration of .10 or more.
Petitioner asserts the revocation was improper because a privately administered chemical test showed that his blood alcohol concentration was only .043, Even assuming the accuracy of this evidence it has no relevance to the issue here. Whether the arresting officer had reasonable grounds to believe petitioner was violating the statute is the focus of inquiry, not whether in fact the statute was violated. I would affirm the district court.