Swartz v. Director of Revenue

Missouri Court of Appeals

Swartz v. Director of Revenue

502 S.W.3d 754, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1073, 2016 WL 6236647

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 25, 2016

DocketWD78677

StatusPublished

This text of 502 S.W.3d 754 (Swartz v. Director of Revenue) 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

Swartz v. Director of Revenue, 502 S.W.3d 754, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1073, 2016 WL 6236647 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Jerry J. Swartz. appeals from the trial court’s judgment suspending his driving [755]*755privileges pursuant to section 302.525. Swartz contends that the trial court erred in upholding the Director of Revenue’s (“Director”) suspension of his. driving privileges because there was no probable cause to arrest him for driving while intoxicated as “the only indicia of intoxication was bloodshot and watery eyes and the moderate odor of alcohol.” Because a. published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Jerry J. Swartz. appeals from the trial court’s judgment suspending his driving [755]*755privileges pursuant to section 302.525. Swartz contends that the trial court erred in upholding the Director of Revenue’s (“Director”) suspension of his. driving privileges because there was no probable cause to arrest him for driving while intoxicated as “the only indicia of intoxication was bloodshot and watery eyes and the moderate odor of alcohol.” Because a. published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

502 S.W.3d 754, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1073, 2016 WL 6236647, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/swartz-v-director-of-revenue-moctapp-2016.