Summary
The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of Dale Wagstaff’s petition for a probationary commercial driver’s license during a suspension arising from a DUI committed in a noncommercial vehicle. The court held that the commercial-driver suspension statute cited by Wagstaff was inapplicable and that he could not challenge the retroactivity of amended probationary-license provisions because he had not first applied for and been denied a license under the prior statute. The decision was designated noncitable precedent and filed as a public document.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the District Court erred by denying Wagstaff's petition for issuance of a probationary commercial driver's license.
- Whether Wagstaff could challenge the retroactive application of the 2001 amendments to § 61-2-302, MCA, without first applying for and being denied a probationary license under the 1999 version of that statute.
Holdings
- Wagstaff could not contest retroactive application of the 2001 amendments because he had not first established that he applied for and was denied a probationary license under the 1999 version of § 61-2-302, MCA.
- Section 61-8-811, MCA, did not govern Wagstaff's suspension because his DUI involved a noncommercial vehicle; his suspension instead arose under §§ 61-5-205(2) and 61-5-208(2)(b), MCA.
Key quotations
“the following decision shall not be cited as precedent but shall be filed as a public document with the clerk of the Supreme Court” (¶ 1)
“We therefore conclude that Wagstaff may not contest the retroactivity of the 2001 amendments since he did not first establish that he applied for, and was denied, a probationary license under the 1999 version of § 61-2-302, MCA.” (¶ 15)
Factual background
Wagstaff, a semi-truck owner and operator, was cited for driving a private, noncommercial vehicle under the influence on July 10, 2001, and pleaded guilty to DUI on December 4, 2001. After the Division received notice of his conviction, it suspended his driver's license and driving privileges from March 14 through September 13, 2002, while advising him that he could obtain a probationary license upon payment of a reinstatement fee and surrender of his licenses and permits. Wagstaff challenged the denial of a probationary commercial license, asserting that applying 2001 statutory amendments retroactively would violate the Montana Constitution.
Procedural history
Wagstaff petitioned the Thirteenth Judicial District Court to require the Motor Vehicle Division to show cause why he should not receive a probationary commercial driver's license. The District Court denied the petition, concluding that Wagstaff had not requested a probationary license under § 61-2-302, MCA (1999). The Montana Supreme Court affirmed without reaching the retroactivity issue.