Charlson v. State ex rel. Department of Public Safety

Summary

The Oklahoma Supreme Court held that an obvious scrivener's error in the Oklahoma Register did not invalidate an administrative rule approving the Guth 2100 breath simulator. The court concluded that the rule had been properly promulgated and that the published error could be corrected judicially to reflect the agency-approved language. The district court's judgment sustaining a demurrer in a driver's license revocation proceeding was reversed and remanded.

Holdings

1. An obvious scrivener's error in the published Oklahoma Register did not invalidate the administrative rule as properly promulgated by the agency and approved through the required legislative and executive processes. The Court could correct the error by judicial pronouncement, and the rule retained the force of law as originally adopted.
2. The Guth 2100 was properly approved under the Board's rule and could be used to calibrate the Intoxilyzer for purposes of the Implied Consent Law, notwithstanding the erroneous model number appearing in the Oklahoma Register.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a scrivener's error in the Oklahoma Register invalidated an administrative rule that had been properly adopted by the agency, reviewed by the Legislature, and approved by the Governor.
2. Whether the Guth 2100 breath simulator was an approved device for purposes of validating the alcohol-concentration test and driver's-license revocation.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded