Voss v. Iowa Department of Transportation, Motor Vehicle Division

Summary

The Iowa Supreme Court held that Iowa Code section 321J.8 does not require an implied consent advisory to be reread before each additional chemical test requested after an initial test. Because the advisory given to Voss adequately explained the consequences of refusing or failing a chemical test and the officer answered his questions, the court upheld the license revocation and remanded for affirmance of the agency decision.

Holdings

1. Section 321J.8 does not impose a rigid requirement that the implied consent advisory be reread before every additional chemical test. When the original advisory adequately informs the person of the consequences applicable to the requested tests and the statutory purpose is otherwise accomplished, rereading is unnecessary.
2. The DOT correctly determined that the officer complied with Iowa Code section 321J.8, and Voss's license revocation was proper.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Iowa Code section 321J.8 requires an officer to reread the implied consent advisory before administering each additional chemical test.
2. Whether the DOT correctly determined that the officer complied with section 321J.8 when the advisory was given before the breath test, the officer answered questions about the later urine test, and the advisory was not reread.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded