Garrett v. Director of Revenue

507 S.W.3d 615, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1195, 2016 WL 6872081
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided November 22, 2016·No. No. ED 103989·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Chalanda Garrett appeals from the circuit court’s judgment upholding the administrative revocation of her driving privileges for refusing to submit to a chemical analysis of her breath under Missouri’s Implied Consent Law. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the judgment of the circuit court was supported by substantial evidence, was not against the weight of the evidence, and did not erroneously declare or apply the law. Velluto v. Dir. of Revenue, 383 S.W.3d 14, 17 (Mo. App. E.D. 2012). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

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

Garrett v. Director of Revenue, 507 S.W.3d 615, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1195, 2016 WL 6872081 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).

507 S.W.3d 615 (Garrett v. Director of Revenue) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Velluto v. Director of Revenue
383 S.W.3d 14 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2012)