Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448

2018 Georgia Code 40-5-66 | Car Wreck Lawyer

TITLE 40 MOTOR VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC

Section 5. Drivers' Licenses, 40-5-1 through 40-5-179.

ARTICLE 3 CANCELLATION, SUSPENSION, AND REVOCATION OF LICENSES

40-5-66. Appeals from decisions of department.

  1. Except as provided in subsection (h) of Code Section 40-5-67.1, subsection (h) of Code Section 40-5-64, and subsection (g) of Code Section 40-5-64.1, any decision rendered by the department shall be final unless the aggrieved person shall desire an appeal. In such case, such person shall have the right to enter an appeal in the superior court of the county of his or her residence or in the Superior Court of Fulton County. Such appeal shall name the commissioner as defendant and must be filed within 30 days from the date the department enters its decision or order. The person filing the appeal shall not be required to post any bond nor to pay the costs in advance.
  2. If the person so desires, the appeal may be heard by the judge at term or in chambers or by a jury at the first term. The hearing on the appeal shall be de novo, but no appeal shall act as a supersedeas of any orders or acts of the department. No person shall be allowed to operate any vehicle in violation of any suspension or revocation by the department while any such appeal is pending.

(Ga. L. 1937, p. 322, art. 4, § 11; Ga. L. 1943, p. 196, § 5; Ga. L. 1951, p. 598, § 8; Code 1933, § 68B-315, enacted by Ga. L. 1975, p. 1008, § 1; Ga. L. 1989, p. 14, § 40; Ga. L. 1990, p. 2048, § 4; Ga. L. 1992, p. 2564, § 4; Ga. L. 2016, p. 323, § 2-4/HB 205; Ga. L. 2017, p. 774, § 40/HB 323.)

The 2016 amendment, effective July 1, 2017, substituted "Code Section 40-5-67.1, subsection (h) of Code Section 40-5-64, and subsection (g) of Code Section 40-5-64.1," for "Code Section 40-5-67.1 and subsection (h) of Code Section 40-5-64," in the first sentence of subsection (a).

The 2017 amendment, effective July 1, 2017, part of an Act to revise, modernize, and correct the Code, substituted "his or her" for "his" near the middle of the second sentence of subsection (a).

Law reviews.

- For note on 1992 amendment of this Code section, see 9 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 298 (1992).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Due process.

- Right to appeal to the state court system under O.C.G.A. § 40-5-66 from a driver's license revocation does not rectify the procedural due process flaws inherent in the revocation hearing procedures because that section does not afford a prerevocation hearing. Smith v. Commissioner of Ga. Dep't of Pub. Safety, 673 F. Supp. 446 (M.D. Ga. 1987).

Jurisdiction to determine habitual violator status.

- Because an administrative law judge lacked jurisdiction to address the issue of a driver's habitual violator status, and thus, the ruling that the driver was wrongfully declared an habitual offender was not binding on the parties, the driver was not entitled to mandamus relief ordering the Commissioner of the Department of Driver Services to issue a driver's license. James v. Davis, 280 Ga. 497, 629 S.E.2d 820 (2006).

Hearing required unless waived.

- Although the superior court is not required to conduct a hearing concerning the merits of the Department of Public Safety's decision to revoke the driver's license of an aggrieved party if the parties waive the parties' right to be heard, the superior court cannot avoid the dictates of O.C.G.A. §§ 5-3-29 and9-10-2 by simply failing to hold a hearing. Bowman v. Parrot, 200 Ga. App. 405, 408 S.E.2d 115, cert. denied, 200 Ga. App. 895, 408 S.E.2d 115 (1991).

Appeal to department does not affect appeal rights to superior court.

- Even though defendant elected to first pursue an administrative appeal of a driver's license suspension to the Department of Public Safety, and was unsuccessful in that effort, the defendant was still entitled to file an appeal in the superior court under O.C.G.A. § 40-5-66, at which the defendant could receive a meaningful hearing upon request and, accordingly, the defendant was not denied the right to procedural due process. Miles v. Shaw, 272 Ga. 475, 532 S.E.2d 373 (2000).

Timeliness of appeal.

- Lower courts erred in determining that an applicant's petition was untimely because the Georgia Department of Driver Services canceled, but did not revoke, the license that it had issued to the applicant; thus, the applicant was entitled by the plain terms of O.C.G.A. § 40-5-66 to make an application for a new license at any time after the cancellation. Barrow v. Mikell, 298 Ga. 429, 782 S.E.2d 439 (2016).

Standard of review.

- It was error to affirm a decision to suspend a driver's license when, after being advised of the implied consent rights and of the consequences of refusing to submit to a state-administered breath test, the driver refused the test; as the correct standard of review was the "any evidence" test, because the hearing before the ALJ was conducted pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 40-5-67.1, the appeal in the superior court was expressly excepted from O.C.G.A. § 40-5-66(a), and had to be conducted pursuant to § 40-5-67.1(h); moreover, the administered breath tests were not invalid merely because the officer gave the breath tests ten minutes apart, and the driver's failure to give an adequate sample could not be used to suspend the license. Dozier v. Pierce, 279 Ga. App. 464, 631 S.E.2d 379 (2006).

Untimely appeal warranted dismissal.

- Trial court erred in denying a motion by the Georgia Department of Public Safety (DPS) to dismiss a motorist's petition for judicial review of a decision by the DPS which denied the motorist's application for reinstatement of the motorist's driver's license as the petition for judicial review was not filed within 30 days from the date that the DPS entered its decision as required under O.C.G.A. § 40-5-66(a). Hightower v. Cervantes, 259 Ga. App. 562, 578 S.E.2d 240 (2003).

Trial court erred by reversing the decision of the Georgia Department of Driver Services because the evidence supported the decision of the department in denying, as untimely, the driver's request for an administrative license suspension hearing, pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 40-5-67.1(g), since the actions of the driver's attorney in failing to mail a timely request for a hearing were imputed to the driver. Mikell v. Hortenstine, 334 Ga. App. 621, 780 S.E.2d 53 (2015).

Cited in Cofer v. Crowell, 146 Ga. App. 639, 247 S.E.2d 152 (1978); Akin v. Hardison, 245 Ga. 57, 262 S.E.2d 814 (1980); Hardison v. Shepard, 246 Ga. 196, 269 S.E.2d 458 (1980); Hardison v. Haslam, 250 Ga. 59, 295 S.E.2d 830 (1982); Hardison v. Martin, 254 Ga. 719, 334 S.E.2d 161 (1985); Earp v. Angel, 182 Ga. App. 860, 357 S.E.2d 596 (1987); Wells v. State, 212 Ga. App. 15, 440 S.E.2d 692 (1994).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 7A Am. Jur. 2d, Automobiles and Highway Traffic, §§ 107, 154 et seq.

C.J.S.

- 60 C.J.S., Motor Vehicles, § 433 et seq.

ALR.

- Suspension or revocation of driver's license for refusal to take sobriety test, 88 A.L.R.2d 1064.

Statute providing for judicial review of administrative order revoking or suspending automobile driver's license as providing for trial de novo, 97 A.L.R.2d 1367.

Cases Citing O.C.G.A. § 40-5-66

Total Results: 7  |  Sort by: Relevance  |  Newest First

Copy

Hardison v. Martin, 334 S.E.2d 161 (Ga. 1985).

Cited 21 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Sep 10, 1985 | 254 Ga. 719

...t, and that his license was to be revoked for a period of five years from that date. Martin's petition to the Department to reinstate his license was denied on March 9, 1984. Martin appealed this decision to the Superior Court of Clarke County. OCGA § 40-5-66....
...erefore, is the proper party to this action. 3. The Commissioner argues that habeas relief should not be available to Martin because he has failed to pursue his right to a de novo appeal from the revocation of his license in the superior court. OCGA § 40-5-66. Martin's attack on his conviction of attempting to elude a police officer is collateral to the issues which may be raised in the de novo appeal under OCGA § 40-5-66....
Copy

Miles v. Shaw, 532 S.E.2d 373 (Ga. 2000).

Cited 8 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jun 12, 2000 | 272 Ga. 475, 2000 Fulton County D. Rep. 2234

...She was convicted in the Recorder's Court of both charges, and her driver's license was suspended for 12 months by DPS. Wishing to pursue an appeal of her suspension, appellee had two options available to her: (1) pursue a de novo appeal in the superior court pursuant to OCGA § 40-5-66; or (2) defer the de novo appeal and pursue a DPS administrative review under DPS Rule 570-1-.06....
...Upon receiving notice of DPS's decision to uphold the suspension, appellee filed a "Petition for Judicial Review of Administrative License Suspension" in the Superior Court of Fulton County, thus triggering the previously deferred de novo appeal set forth in OCGA § 40-5-66....
...er, the superior court erred by treating them as if they did. A licensee such as appellee who elects to first pursue an administrative appeal to DPS, and is unsuccessful in that effort, is still entitled to file an appeal in the superior court under § 40-5-66, at which the licensee will receive a meaningful hearing upon request....
...attempting to elude an officer." [4] Quiller v. Bowman, 262 Ga. 769, 770-771, 425 S.E.2d 641 (1993). [5] Bell v. Burson, 402 U.S. 535, 539, 91 S.Ct. 1586, 29 L.Ed.2d 90 (1971) (addressing Georgia's Motor Vehicle Safety Responsibility Act, Ga.Code Ann. § 92A-601 et seq. (1958)). [6] OCGA § 40-5-66....
Copy

Walton Cnty. v. Scenic Hills Estates, Inc., 401 S.E.2d 513 (Ga. 1991).

Cited 6 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Feb 28, 1991 | 261 Ga. 94

...When a direct appeal to a superior court is authorized, the General Assembly uses express language. For example some statutes provide for a "hearing as provided in Chapter 13 of Title 50, the `Georgia Administrative Procedure Act.'" OCGA §§ 40-5-55, 40-5-64, and 40-5-66....
Copy

Earp v. Angel, 257 Ga. 333 (Ga. 1987).

Cited 3 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jul 9, 1987 | 357 S.E.2d 596

...be the predicate offenses for an adjudication of habitual violator. The habeas court granted the relief sought, and the Commissioner appealed. We reverse but for another reason. Appellee failed to follow the appellate procedure available under OCGA § 40-5-66 to attack his adjudication as a habitual violator....
Copy

Barrow v. Mikell Et Al., 298 Ga. 429 (Ga. 2016).

Cited 2 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Feb 1, 2016 | 782 S.E.2d 439

...Such appeal shall name the commissioner as defendant and must be filed within 30 days from the date the department enters its decision or order. The person filing the appeal shall not be required to post any bond nor to pay the costs in advance. OCGA § 40-5-66 (a).1 The denial of an application for a driver’s license most certainly amounts to “[a] decision rendered by the [D]epartment,” and it is, therefore, a decision that may properly be subjected to judicial review under OCGA § 40-5-66 (a)....
...117, 119 (1847) (statutory right of appeal from “any” decision was comprehensive, permitting appeals from “all decisions,” including interlocutory orders, final judgments, and discretionary decisions). See also Deal v. Coleman, 294 Ga. 170, 172 (1) (a) 1 The two exceptions identified in OCGA § 40-5-66 (a) clearly do not apply here, and the Department does not contend otherwise. 2 (751 SE2d 337) (2013) (“[W]e must presume that the General Assembly meant what it said and said what it meant.”). Indeed, the Department does not dispute that OCGA § 40-5-66 (a) ordinarily permits judicial review of the denial of an application for a driver’s license....
...That changed, however, in 2005 with the creation of the Department of Driver Services. See Ga. L. 2005, p. 334. 4 [The petitioner] failed to follow the appellate procedure available under OCGA § 40-5-66 to attack his adjudication as a habitual violator....
...tioner in Angel. The habeas court in Lynch granted the writ, and again, the Commissioner of Public 5 Safety appealed. See id. We reversed, holding again that the failure to seek judicial review under OCGA § 40-5-66 worked a procedural bar in habeas: [O]ne who wishes to contest a license revocation decision by the Department of Public Safety must follow the appellate procedure available under OCGA § 40-5-66 to attack his adjudication as a habitual violator. Further, the failure to bring a timely appeal [of an administrative decision] is a waiver of the right to appeal. Id. at 633-634 (citation and punctuation omitted). In our opinion, we added that “OCGA § 40-5-66 requires appeals to be made within thirty days of the revocation decision by the Department of Public Safety.” Id....
...his petition for judicial review. The Court of Appeals properly acknowledged that it is bound by Angel and Lynch as precedents, and it seems to have been persuaded that those precedents apply in this case especially by our statement in Lynch that “OCGA § 40-5-66 requires appeals to be made within thirty days of the revocation decision.” See Barrow, 331 Ga....
...6 conclude that their reliance upon those precedents was misplaced for two reasons. To begin, neither Angel nor Lynch can properly be understood as announcing any holding about the time in which a petition for judicial review under OCGA § 40-5-66 must be filed. That is precisely because no such petition was at issue in Angel or Lynch. In both Angel and Lynch, the petitioners filed no petition under OCGA § 40-5-66, and the petitioners attempted instead to skip right past the usual procedures for judicial review of administrative decisions and to obtain relief in habeas....
...It is well settled in habeas, however, that one must exhaust his other available remedies before resorting to the writ of habeas corpus for relief. See In the Matter of Stoner, 252 Ga. 397, 398 (314 SE2d 214) (1984). Anything that we said in Angel and Lynch about the timeliness of a petition under OCGA § 40-5-66 was dicta. Moreover, there is an important distinction between Angel and Lynch, on the one hand, and this case, on the other....
Copy

Earp v. Lynch, 257 Ga. 633 (Ga. 1987).

Cited 2 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Nov 24, 1987 | 362 S.E.2d 55

...nd the judgment below must be reversed. Pursuant to OCGA § 40-5-58, appellant on December 10, 1984, revoked appellee’s driver’s license. Lynch did not appeal the revocation within thirty days of the Department’s decision, as required by OCGA § 40-5-66....
...priate to contest a revocation. Hardison v. Martin, 254 Ga. 719 (1) (334 SE2d 161) (1985). But one who wishes to contest a license revocation decision by *634the Department of Public Safety must “follow the appellate procedure available under OCGA § 40-5-66 to attack his adjudication as a habitual violator.” Earp v....
...Further, the failure to bring a timely appeal is a waiver of the right to appeal. Id. Decided November 24, 1987. Michael J. Bowers, Attorney General, Neal B. Childers, Assistant Attorney General, for appellant. Lavigno & Dawkins, Salvatore J. Serio, for appellee. As previously noted, OCGA § 40-5-66 requires appeals to be made within thirty days of the revocation decision by the Department of Public Safety....
Copy

James v. Davis, 280 Ga. 497 (Ga. 2006).

Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | May 8, 2006 | 629 S.E.2d 820, 2006 Fulton County D. Rep. 1416

...Commissioner Davis, on the other hand, contends that the administrative law judge did not have jurisdiction to address the issue of James’s habitual violator status, and that therefore his ruling was not binding on the parties. We agree with the Commissioner’s contention. Under OCGA§ 40-5-66 (a), a person aggrieved by a final decision declaring him a habitual violator has a statutory right of appeal to superior court....