Dunker v. Director of Revenue

938 S.W.2d 663, 1997 Mo. App. LEXIS 239
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided February 18, 1997·No. No. 70313·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Kristine K. Dunker (“driver”), appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of Cape Girardeau County sustaining the suspension of her driving privileges by respondent, the Director of Revenue for the State of Missouri (“Director”), for driving a motor vehicle while her blood alcohol content (“BAC”) was .10 percent or more. See RSMo § 302.505 (1994). We affirm.

Driver claims Director did not meet her burden of proof because she failed to prove driver’s blood was drawn in compliance with RSMo § 577.029 (1994), a requirement for the admission of blood test results. See State v. Hanners, 774 S.W.2d 568, 569 (Mo.App. E.D.1989). However, driver did not object when her BAC was admitted into evi[664] dence at trial. If evidence of a driver’s BAC is admitted without objection, the driver waives any objection to this evidence and it may be properly considered even if it would have been excluded upon a proper objection. Reinert v. Director of Revenue, 894 S.W.2d 162, 164 (Mo.banc 1996). “In absence of a specific objection, the State’s failure to prove compliance with even a foundational requirement does not destroy the sufficiency of its case.” Todd v. Lohman, 911 S.W.2d 321, 324 (Mo.App. W.D.1995) (citing Reed v. Director of Revenue, 834 S.W.2d 834, 837 (Mo.App. E.D.1992)). As an extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose, we affirm pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Dunker v. Director of Revenue, 938 S.W.2d 663, 1997 Mo. App. LEXIS 239 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997).

938 S.W.2d 663 (Dunker v. Director of Revenue) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Smith v. Director of Revenue
77 S.W.3d 120 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2002)