Understanding the Admin Per Se Hearing in Arizona

When someone is arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence (DUI) in Arizona, they face not only criminal charges but also the possibility of losing their driving privileges through an Administrative Per Se hearing. This civil proceeding is separate from the criminal case and is conducted by the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) Motor Vehicle Division (MVD). In these hearings, the stakes are high, as the outcome could result in the suspension or revocation of your driver’s license, even if you are not convicted of a DUI in criminal court.

Here’s a breakdown of what you need to know about the scope and standard of review in an administrative per se hearing in Arizona, including the unique role the judge plays in these proceedings and how they differ from criminal DUI cases.

Scope of the Hearing: What’s Covered

An administrative per se hearing is limited in scope, focusing on the following issues:

1. Reasonable Grounds for the Stop: The hearing examines whether the officer had reasonable grounds to believe that the driver was under the influence of alcohol or drugs at the time of the stop or interaction.

2. Probable Cause for Arrest: The hearing will review whether the arresting officer had probable cause to believe that the driver was operating or in actual physical control of the vehicle while impaired.

3. Results of the Chemical Test:

• If a breath or blood test was conducted, the hearing will look at whether the test was properly administered and whether the driver’s blood alcohol concentration (BAC) was at or above the legal limit (0.08% for most drivers, 0.04% for commercial drivers).

• If the driver refused to take the test, the hearing focuses on whether the refusal was justified and if the officer properly explained the consequences of refusal.

What’s not covered in these hearings is the driver’s guilt or innocence regarding DUI criminal charges. The hearing only determines whether the person’s driving privileges should be suspended, based on the officer’s actions and the evidence gathered at the scene.

Standard of Review: Preponderance of the Evidence

Unlike criminal trials, where the prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, the standard of proof in an administrative per se hearing is significantly lower. The state only needs to show that it is more likely than not that the conditions for a license suspension have been met. This is known as the preponderance of the evidence standard.

Essentially, the state must demonstrate that there is a greater than 50% chance that:

• The officer had reasonable grounds to believe the driver was impaired,

• The arrest was supported by probable cause, and

• The chemical test results (or refusal) were valid and justified the suspension of driving privileges.

The Dual Role of the Hearing Officer: Judge and Prosecutor

One of the most striking differences between an administrative per se hearing and a criminal trial is the role of the hearing officer. In these hearings, the officer acts as both the judge and the prosecutor. This means that:

• The hearing officer decides what evidence will be considered.

• The hearing officer can also question witnesses and the driver.

• The hearing officer ultimately makes the decision on whether to suspend or revoke the driver’s license.

This dual role can feel quite different from a traditional courtroom experience. In a criminal case, the judge is neutral, and a separate prosecutor presents the state’s case. However, in an administrative per se hearing, the hearing officer essentially controls the entire process, often leading to a perception that the deck is stacked against the driver.

How Administrative Per Se Hearings Differ from Criminal Proceedings

While an administrative per se hearing and a criminal DUI case may seem similar, they are fundamentally different processes, both in purpose and procedure. Here’s how:

1. Civil vs. Criminal: An administrative per se hearing is a civil matter, not a criminal case. The only issue at stake in the APS hearing is whether your driving privileges should be suspended. In contrast, a criminal DUI case determines whether you are guilty of driving under the influence, which can lead to fines, jail time, probation, and a criminal record.

2. Standard of Proof: As mentioned earlier, the standard of proof in an APS hearing is preponderance of the evidence—the state must show that it is more likely than not that the conditions for a license suspension are met. In a criminal DUI case, the state must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, which is a much higher standard.

3. Role of the Judge: In a criminal DUI case, the judge is a neutral party, and the state’s case is presented by a prosecutor. In an APS hearing, the hearing officer acts as both judge and prosecutor, making decisions on the evidence and questioning the driver.

4. Scope: The APS hearing only focuses on whether the arresting officer had reasonable grounds for the stop, whether probable cause existed for the arrest, and whether the driver refused or failed a chemical test. The hearing does not address the underlying facts of the DUI criminal charge, such as whether the driver is guilty of driving under the influence. The criminal proceedings, on the other hand, cover all aspects of the DUI charge, including whether the driver violated Arizona’s DUI laws.

5. Outcome: In an administrative per se hearing, the main consequence is the suspension or revocation of the driver’s license. The outcome in a criminal DUI case, however, can include much more severe penalties, such as jail time, fines, and a permanent criminal record, in addition to license suspension.

6. Timing: The administrative per se hearing often occurs before the criminal DUI case is resolved. This means that even if you are later found not guilty of DUI in criminal court, your driving privileges could still be suspended based on the outcome of the APS hearing.

Key Takeaways

• Limited Scope: The hearing focuses only on whether your license should be suspended due to reasonable grounds for the stop, probable cause for the arrest, and the results of (or refusal to take) a chemical test.

• Lower Standard of Proof: Unlike in a criminal trial, the state only needs to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence—meaning it must show that it’s more likely than not that you were impaired and that the license suspension is justified.

• Hearing Officer’s Role: The hearing officer serves as both judge and prosecutor, deciding on the evidence and ultimately determining whether your license will be suspended.

• Differences from Criminal Proceedings: The APS hearing is a civil, administrative process separate from the criminal DUI case, with a lower burden of proof and a focus solely on driving privileges rather than criminal penalties.

Understanding the process and preparing adequately is crucial, as the outcome of an administrative per se hearing can have significant consequences for your driving privileges. If you’re facing a license suspension or revocation in Arizona, it’s essential to have skilled representation that can guide you through the complexities of the hearing and advocate for your rights.