State v. Svendrowski

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Svendrowski

692 S.W.2d 348, 1985 Mo. App. LEXIS 4061

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 7, 1985

DocketNo. 48669

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 692 S.W.2d 348 (State v. Svendrowski) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Svendrowski, 692 S.W.2d 348, 1985 Mo. App. LEXIS 4061 (Mo. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

CRIST, Judge.

Defendant appeals from a jury conviction of the misdemeanor grade offense of operating a motor vehicle without a license in violation of § 302.020, RSMo 1978. He was fined $100.00. We affirm.

[349]*349Defendant asserts the state had no right to require his social security number as a condition precedent to the issuance of his driver’s license. A driver’s license is a privilege or qualified right. Blydenburg v. David, 413 S.W.2d 284, 289 (Mo. banc 1967). It was reasonable to require defendant furnish his social security number for identification purposes as a condition precedent to the issuance of his driver’s license. There was no constitutional infirmity. Conant v. Hill, 326 F.Supp. 25 (E.D.Va.1971).

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by an extended opinion. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

DOWD, P.J., and CRANDALL, J., concur.

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

CRIST, Judge.

Defendant appeals from a jury conviction of the misdemeanor grade offense of operating a motor vehicle without a license in violation of § 302.020, RSMo 1978. He was fined $100.00. We affirm.

[349]*349Defendant asserts the state had no right to require his social security number as a condition precedent to the issuance of his driver’s license. A driver’s license is a privilege or qualified right. Blydenburg v. David, 413 S.W.2d 284, 289 (Mo. banc 1967). It was reasonable to require defendant furnish his social security number for identification purposes as a condition precedent to the issuance of his driver’s license. There was no constitutional infirmity. Conant v. Hill, 326 F.Supp. 25 (E.D.Va.1971).

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by an extended opinion. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).

DOWD, P.J., and CRANDALL, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

692 S.W.2d 348, 1985 Mo. App. LEXIS 4061, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-svendrowski-moctapp-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack