Kentucky Revised Statutes
Ky. Rev. Stat. § 186.565 (2026)
Repealed, 1991
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
KY-LRCapps.legislature.ky.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Catchline at repeal: Consent to test for alcohol in blood -- Procedure upon refusal -- Ruling -- Judicial review -- Exception -- Application to court to enter driver's education program History: Repealed 1991 (1st Extra. Sess.) Ky. Acts ch. 15, sec. 31, effective July 1, 1991. -- Amended 1984 Ky. Acts ch. 165, sec. 16, effective July 13, 1984. -- Amended 1980 Ky. Acts ch. 103, sec. 2, effective July 15, 1980; and ch. 114, sec. 33, effective July 15, 1980. -- Amended 1978 Ky. Acts ch. 157, sec. 1, effective June 17, 1978. -- Amended 1976 Ky. Acts ch. 29, sec. 1, effective March 5, 1976. -- Amended 1974 Ky. Acts ch. 74, Art. IV, sec. 20(7, (8). -- Amended 1970 Ky. Acts ch. 238, sec. 1. -- Created 1968 Ky. Acts ch. 184, secs. 1 to 6.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 42
cases, 1968–2018 · leading case: Commonwealth Transp. Cabinet Dep't of Veh. Reg. v. Cornell, 796 S.W.2d 591 (Ky. Ct. App. 1990).
Commonwealth Transp. Cabinet Dep't of Veh. Reg. v. Cornell, 796 S.W.2d 591 (Ky. Ct. App. 1990). “Matthews' police officer Thomas Gilsdorf observed the appellee driving erratically and pulled him over for suspicion of driving while under the influence of intoxicants. He placed appellee under arrest and charged him with driving under the influence.”
Newman v. Stinson, 489 S.W.2d 826 (Ky. Ct. App. 1972). “Pursuant to KRS 186.565, an affidavit was filed with the Department of Public Safety certifying the refusal of appellee to submit to the test and thereupon appellee's operator's license was revoked by the Department.”
Speers v. Commonwealth, 828 S.W.2d 638 (Ky. 1992). “The second issue to be addressed only in the cases of Speers and Fortney is whether such blood alcohol test results are admissible evidence only if the subject tested has been arrested before the blood sample is taken, and what is encompassed within the term "arrested" as used…”
Craig v. Commonwealth, Dep't of Pub. Saf., 471 S.W.2d 11 (Ky. Ct. App. 1971). “When the officers smelled the presence of alcoholic beverages and observed his demeanor they placed him under arrest, then according to appellant invited him to take the chemical test authorized by KRS 186.565. By obtaining a license to operate a motor vehicle on the highways of…”
Cook v. Commonwealth, 129 S.W.3d 351 (Ky. 2004). “2d 260, 262-63 (1970) (interpreting former implied consent statute, KRS 186.565). Stack's request satisfied this requirement.”
Commonwealth, Transp. Cabinet v. Tarter, 802 S.W.2d 944 (Ky. Ct. App. 1990). “The interpretation of KRS 186.565, popularly known as the “implied consent law,” is the focus of attention.”
Wells v. Commonwealth, 709 S.W.2d 847 (Ky. Ct. App. 1986). “010(1) provides that “[n]o person shall operate a motor vehicle anywhere in this state while under the influence of alcohol or any other substance which may impair one’s driving ability.”
Wyatt v. Transp. Cabinet, 796 S.W.2d 872 (Ky. Ct. App. 1990). “CLAYTON, Judge: This appeal arises from the Cabinet’s revocation of Wyatt’s driver’s license for his refusal to submit to the breathalyzer test mandated by KRS 186.565(4). The Kenton Circuit Court affirmed the Cabinet’s decision, since it was found to be supported by substantial…”
Commonwealth v. Brown, 560 S.W.3d 873 (Ky. Ct. App. 2018). “In Speers , the Kentucky Supreme Court analyzed KRS 186.565, a former provision regarding implied consent which was repealed by the legislature that replaced the provisions of KRS Chapter 186 with KRS Chapter 189A.”
Commonwealth, Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. Tuemler, 526 S.W.2d 305 (Ky. Ct. App. 1975). “The appeal raises the question of whether the arresting police officer made a proper request for appellee to take the breathalyzer test, including an adequate warning of the effect of his refusal, as required by KRS 186.565. The record reveals that on August 10, 1972, Police…”
Woosley v. Cent. Unif. Rental, 463 S.W.2d 345 (Ky. Ct. App. 1971). “Subsections (1) and (2) of KRS 186.565 (c. 184, Acts of 1968, eff. March 27, 1968) provide as follows: “(1) Any person who operates a motor vehicle in this state is deemed to have given his consent to a chemical test of his blood, breath, urine or saliva for the purpose of…”
Commonwealth, Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. Cheek, 451 S.W.2d 394 (Ky. Ct. App. 1970). “KRS 186.565(3). Appellee timely requested an administrative hearing and challenged the legality of the revocation of his license.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 186.565(1) — 8 cases
Speers v. Commonwealth, 828 S.W.2d 638 (Ky. 1992). “The second issue to be addressed only in the cases of Speers and Fortney is whether such blood alcohol test results are admissible evidence only if the subject tested has been arrested before the blood sample is taken, and what is encompassed within the term "arrested" as used…”
Wells v. Commonwealth, 709 S.W.2d 847 (Ky. Ct. App. 1986). “010(1) provides that “[n]o person shall operate a motor vehicle anywhere in this state while under the influence of alcohol or any other substance which may impair one’s driving ability.”
Newman v. Stinson, 489 S.W.2d 826 (Ky. Ct. App. 1972). “Pursuant to KRS 186.565, an affidavit was filed with the Department of Public Safety certifying the refusal of appellee to submit to the test and thereupon appellee's operator's license was revoked by the Department.”
Commonwealth v. Morriss, 70 S.W.3d 419 (Ky. 2002).
Woosley v. Cent. Unif. Rental, 463 S.W.2d 345 (Ky. Ct. App. 1971). “Subsections (1) and (2) of KRS 186.565 (c. 184, Acts of 1968, eff. March 27, 1968) provide as follows: “(1) Any person who operates a motor vehicle in this state is deemed to have given his consent to a chemical test of his blood, breath, urine or saliva for the purpose of…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 186.565(2) — 2 cases
State v. Garner, 608 P.2d 1321 (Kan. 1980).
Commonwealth v. Hanson, 484 S.W.2d 865 (Ky. Ct. App. 1972).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 186.565(3) — 14 cases
Craig v. Commonwealth, Dep't of Pub. Saf., 471 S.W.2d 11 (Ky. Ct. App. 1971). “When the officers smelled the presence of alcoholic beverages and observed his demeanor they placed him under arrest, then according to appellant invited him to take the chemical test authorized by KRS 186.565. By obtaining a license to operate a motor vehicle on the highways of…”
Speers v. Commonwealth, 828 S.W.2d 638 (Ky. 1992). “The second issue to be addressed only in the cases of Speers and Fortney is whether such blood alcohol test results are admissible evidence only if the subject tested has been arrested before the blood sample is taken, and what is encompassed within the term "arrested" as used…”
Commonwealth, Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. Cheek, 451 S.W.2d 394 (Ky. Ct. App. 1970). “KRS 186.565(3). Appellee timely requested an administrative hearing and challenged the legality of the revocation of his license.”
Cummins v. Lentz, 813 S.W.2d 822 (Ky. Ct. App. 1991).
Commonwealth, Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. Hayden, 484 S.W.2d 97 (Ky. Ct. App. 1972).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 186.565(4) — 12 cases
Commonwealth Transp. Cabinet Dep't of Veh. Reg. v. Cornell, 796 S.W.2d 591 (Ky. Ct. App. 1990). “Matthews' police officer Thomas Gilsdorf observed the appellee driving erratically and pulled him over for suspicion of driving while under the influence of intoxicants. He placed appellee under arrest and charged him with driving under the influence.”
Wyatt v. Transp. Cabinet, 796 S.W.2d 872 (Ky. Ct. App. 1990). “CLAYTON, Judge: This appeal arises from the Cabinet’s revocation of Wyatt’s driver’s license for his refusal to submit to the breathalyzer test mandated by KRS 186.565(4). The Kenton Circuit Court affirmed the Cabinet’s decision, since it was found to be supported by substantial…”
Craig v. Commonwealth, Dep't of Pub. Saf., 471 S.W.2d 11 (Ky. Ct. App. 1971). “When the officers smelled the presence of alcoholic beverages and observed his demeanor they placed him under arrest, then according to appellant invited him to take the chemical test authorized by KRS 186.565. By obtaining a license to operate a motor vehicle on the highways of…”
Commonwealth, Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. Powers, 453 S.W.2d 260 (Ky. Ct. App. 1970).
Commonwealth, Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. Cheek, 451 S.W.2d 394 (Ky. Ct. App. 1970). “KRS 186.565(3). Appellee timely requested an administrative hearing and challenged the legality of the revocation of his license.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 186.565(5) — 11 cases
Commonwealth Transp. Cabinet Dep't of Veh. Reg. v. Cornell, 796 S.W.2d 591 (Ky. Ct. App. 1990). “Matthews' police officer Thomas Gilsdorf observed the appellee driving erratically and pulled him over for suspicion of driving while under the influence of intoxicants. He placed appellee under arrest and charged him with driving under the influence.”
Wyatt v. Transp. Cabinet, 796 S.W.2d 872 (Ky. Ct. App. 1990). “CLAYTON, Judge: This appeal arises from the Cabinet’s revocation of Wyatt’s driver’s license for his refusal to submit to the breathalyzer test mandated by KRS 186.565(4). The Kenton Circuit Court affirmed the Cabinet’s decision, since it was found to be supported by substantial…”
Newman v. Smith, 481 S.W.2d 679 (Ky. Ct. App. 1972).
Commonwealth, Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. Powers, 453 S.W.2d 260 (Ky. Ct. App. 1970).
Commonwealth, Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. Cheek, 451 S.W.2d 394 (Ky. Ct. App. 1970). “KRS 186.565(3). Appellee timely requested an administrative hearing and challenged the legality of the revocation of his license.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 186.565(7) — 1 case
Commonwealth, Transp. Cabinet v. Tarter, 802 S.W.2d 944 (Ky. Ct. App. 1990). “The interpretation of KRS 186.565, popularly known as the “implied consent law,” is the focus of attention.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.