La. R.S. » RS
Louisiana Revised Statutes & Codes

La. Rev. Stat. § 32:668 (2026)

Procedure following revocation or denial of license; hearing; court review; review of final order; restricted licenses

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section LA-LEGlegis.la.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§668. Procedure following revocation or denial of license; hearing; court review; review of final order; restricted licenses

           A. Upon suspending the license or permit to drive or nonresident operating privilege of any person or upon determining that the issuance of a license or permit shall be denied to the person, the Department of Public Safety and Corrections shall immediately notify the person in writing and upon his request shall afford him an opportunity for a hearing based upon the department's records or other evidence admitted at the hearing, and in the same manner and under the same conditions as is provided in R.S. 32:414 for notification and hearings in the case of suspension of licenses, except that no law enforcement officer shall be compelled by such person to appear or testify at such hearing and there shall be a rebuttable presumption that any inconsistencies in evidence submitted by the department and admitted at the hearing shall be strictly construed in favor of the person regarding the revocation, suspension, or denial of license. The scope of such a hearing for the purposes of this Part shall be limited to the following issues:

           (1) Whether a law enforcement officer had reasonable grounds to believe that the person, regardless of age, had been driving or was in actual physical control of a motor vehicle upon the public highways of this state, or had been driving or was in actual physical control of a motor-powered watercraft upon the public navigable waterways of this state, while under the influence of either alcoholic beverages or any drug, combination of drugs, or combination of alcohol and drugs.

           (2) Whether the person was placed under arrest.

           (3) Whether he was advised by the officer as provided in R.S. 32:661.

           (4) Whether he voluntarily submitted to an approved chemical test and whether the test resulted in a blood alcohol reading of 0.08 percent or above by weight, or of 0.02 percent or above if he was under the age of twenty-one years on the date of the test.

           (5) Whether he refused to submit to the test upon the request of the officer.

           (6) Such additional matters as may relate to the legal rights of the person, including compliance with regulations promulgated by the Department of Public Safety and Corrections and rights afforded to the person by law or jurisprudence.

           B.(1)(a) In a case of first or second refusal, or a first or second submission to a test for intoxication, if suspension is otherwise proper, upon a showing of proof satisfactory to the department that an approved and functioning ignition interlock device has been installed in the vehicle the person shall drive, and that the suspension of driving privileges would prevent the person from earning a livelihood, the department may:

           (i) Require the licensee to surrender his regular license and issue in its stead at a cost to the person of fifty dollars plus the cost of the license a special restricted operator's license designated as such by a large red R printed on the face of the license, to be effective for the remaining period of suspension.

           (ii) Designate in writing, and upon application of the person to amend as necessary, the routes over which and the times during which the restricted licensee shall be permitted to operate designated motor vehicles in order to earn his livelihood, which written restrictions shall be attached to the restricted license and kept with it at all times.

           (b) No person who has refused a chemical test for intoxication is eligible for a restricted license for the first ninety days of the suspension. When a person submits to a chemical test and the results show a blood alcohol level of 0.08 percent or above by weight, or of 0.02 percent or above if the person was under the age of twenty-one years on the date of the test, he is not eligible for a restricted license for the first thirty days of the suspension.

           (c) However, any licensee who has had his license suspended for a first or second offense of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcoholic beverages under the provisions of this Subsection, shall, upon proof of need to the Department of Public Safety and Corrections, be immediately eligible for and shall be issued an ignition interlock restricted license sufficient to maintain livelihood or allow the licensee to maintain the necessities of life. In the event that the department fails or refuses to issue the restricted driver's license, the district court for the parish in which the licensee resides may issue an order directing the department to issue the ignition interlock restricted license either by ex parte order or after contradictory hearing.

           (2) However, the department shall immediately cancel and seize the restricted license upon receiving satisfactory evidence of violation of the restrictions, and no person shall have driving privileges of any kind for a period of six months from the receipt by the department of the cancelled restricted license.

           C.(1) After a person has exhausted his remedies with the department, he shall have the right to file a petition in the appropriate court for a review of the final order of suspension or denial by the Department of Public Safety and Corrections in the same manner and under the same conditions as is provided in R.S. 32:414 in the cases of suspension, revocation, and cancellation of licenses. The court in its review of the final order of suspension or denial by the Department of Public Safety and Corrections may exercise any action it deems necessary under the law including ordering the department to grant the person restricted non-commercial driving privileges where appropriate as provided in Subsection B of this Section.

           (2) Upon filing a petition for review, the licensee shall serve the Department of Public Safety and Corrections with a copy of the petition and summons. Upon receipt of a copy of the petition for review, the department shall issue the licensee driving privileges, which shall be valid until the decision on the petition for review is final. The court on its own motion, or on the motion of either party, may modify or vacate such driving privileges upon a showing of good cause.

           D. Any person who has his license suspended, revoked, or is subject to installation of an ignition interlock device pursuant to R.S. 32:667(I) or R.S. 14:98, 98.1, 98.2, 98.3, or 98.4 shall receive credit for the time period of which the ignition interlock device was installed.

           Acts 1983, No. 632, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1984. Acts 1984, No. 409, §1; Acts 1985, No. 194, §1, eff. July 6, 1985; Acts 1985, No. 816, §1; Acts 1985, No. 572, §1; Acts 1990, No. 932, §1; Acts 1992, No. 605, §1; Acts 1993, No. 17, §1, eff. May 18, 1993; Acts 1993, No. 453, §1; Acts 1994, 3rd Ex. Sess., No. 20, §2; Acts 1995, No. 516, §1; Acts 1995, No. 520, §2; Acts 1995, No. 1070, §1; Acts 1997, No. 1184, §1; Acts 1997, No. 1296, §3, eff. July 15, 1997; Acts 1997, No. 1297, §1, eff. July 15, 1997; Acts 1999, No. 1146, §1; Acts 1999, No. 1212, §1; Acts 2000, 1st Ex. Sess., No. 91, §1; Acts 2001, No. 781, §4, eff. Sept. 30, 2003; Acts 2001, No. 886, §1; Acts 2007, No. 413, §1; Acts 2009, No. 287, §1; Acts 2012, No. 559, §1, eff. August 1, 2012; Acts 2013, No. 388, §3, eff. June 18, 2013; Acts 2016, No. 366, §1, eff. August 1, 2016; Acts 2024, 2nd E.S., No. 9, §2, eff. July 1, 2024; Acts 2024, No. 662, §2, eff. August 1, 2024.

NOTE: Section 6 of Acts 2001, No. 781, provides that the provisions of the Act shall become null and of no effect if and when Section 351 of P.L. 106-346 regarding the withholding of federal highway funds for failure to enact a 0.08 percent blood alcohol level is repealed or invalidated for any reason.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 77 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1972–2026 · leading case: Boe v. State, 558 So. 2d 1333 (La. Ct. App. 1990).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Boe v. State, 558 So. 2d 1333 (La. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 16× “32:667 and R.S. 32:668 plaintiff was afforded an administrative hearing at which his suspension was upheld.”
Flynn v. State, Dept. of Pub. Saf. & Corr., 608 So. 2d 994 (La. 1992). · cites it 8× “ovides for appearance fees for law enforcement officers who are "subpoenaed by the Department of Public Safety and Corrections for the purpose of appearing and giving testimony in any proceeding for judicial review of administrative action of the Department of Public Safety and…”
Ritchie v. Dept. of Pub. Saf. & Corr., 595 So. 2d 1158 (La. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 8× “(2) The temporary receipt shall also provide and serve as notice to the person that he has not more than ten days from the date of arrest to make written request to the Department of Public Safety and Corrections for an administrative hearing in accordance with the provisions of…”
Harrison v. State, Dept. of Pub. Saf., Driv. Lic. Div., 298 So. 2d 312 (La. Ct. App. 1974). · cites it 8× “32:667 and LSA-R.S. 32:668 of the Implied Consent Law declared unconstitutional and to enjoin the defendant, the State of Louisiana, Department of Public Safety, Drivers License Division (hereinafter referred to as Agency) from suspending his driving privileges for refusing to…”
David Carver v. Louisiana Dep't of Pub. Saf., 239 So. 3d 226 (La. 2018). · cites it 6× “R.S. 32:668 (A). If the administrative hearing officer upholds the suspension, the arrestee then has the right to appeal the decision of the administrative hearing to a judicial court.”
Millen v. State Dep. of Pub. Saf. & Corr., 978 So. 2d 957 (La. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 4× “When the driver requests a hearing, the state must prove the officer had "reasonable grounds" to believe the person had been driving a motor vehicle upon the public highways while under the influence of alcohol, that the person was placed under arrest and advised by the officer…”
Jaubert v. Dep't of Pub. Saf., 323 So. 2d 212 (La. Ct. App. 1975). · cites it 9× “LSA-R.S. 32:668. At this hearing, Jaubert, his son who was with him at the time of his arrest, and his wife were the only persons to testify.”
Schott v. State ex rel. Dep't of Pub. Saf., 556 So. 2d 999 (La. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 5× “The Department argues on appeal that plaintiff is not entitled to a hardship license because LSA-R.S. 32:668 B(l)(c) mandates that a person who has refused to submit to a test for intoxication is not eligible for a restricted license for the first 90 days of the suspension and…”
Butler v. Dept of Pub. Saf. & Corr., 609 So. 2d 790 (La. 1992). · cites it 2× “R.S. 32:668. La.R.S. 32:667A(2) (1989). If no timely request is filed, the person's driver's license may be suspended for ninety days on a first offense without eligibility for a hardship license for the first thirty days, and for three hundred sixty-five days without…”
Meyer v. State, Dept. of Pub. Saf. Lic. Con., Etc., 312 So. 2d 289 (La. 1975). · cites it 3× “32:661-669), Oliver Meyer filed suit in the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans (R.S. 32:668, R.S. 32:414, subd. E) seeking to enjoin and prohibit the Department of Public Safety from suspending his driving privileges.”
Bizette v. State, Dept. of Pub. Saf., 583 So. 2d 875 (La. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 3× “Plaintiff then requested an administrative hearing under LSA-R.S. 32:668 A, which was held on December 19, 1988.”
Spreadbury v. State, Dept. of Pub. Saf., 745 So. 2d 1204 (La. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 3× “After being notified of the suspension of his license, plaintiff requested an administrative hearing in accordance with LSA-R.S. 32:668 and LSA-R.S. 32:414. The hearing was held before an administrative law judge (ALJ) on April 23, 1997.”
Show all 77 citing cases →
La. Rev. Stat. § 32:668(A): 20 cases
Millen v. State Dep. of Pub. Saf. & Corr., 978 So. 2d 957 (La. Ct. App. 2007). “When the driver requests a hearing, the state must prove the officer had "reasonable grounds" to believe the person had been driving a motor vehicle upon the public highways while under the influence of alcohol, that the person was placed under arrest and advised by the officer…”
Spreadbury v. State, Dept. of Pub. Saf., 745 So. 2d 1204 (La. Ct. App. 1999). “After being notified of the suspension of his license, plaintiff requested an administrative hearing in accordance with LSA-R.S. 32:668 and LSA-R.S. 32:414. The hearing was held before an administrative law judge (ALJ) on April 23, 1997.”
Harrison v. State, Dept. of Pub. Saf., Driv. Lic. Div., 298 So. 2d 312 (La. Ct. App. 1974). “32:667 and LSA-R.S. 32:668 of the Implied Consent Law declared unconstitutional and to enjoin the defendant, the State of Louisiana, Department of Public Safety, Drivers License Division (hereinafter referred to as Agency) from suspending his driving privileges for refusing to…”
Flynn v. State, Dept. of Pub. Saf. & Corr., 608 So. 2d 994 (La. 1992). “ovides for appearance fees for law enforcement officers who are "subpoenaed by the Department of Public Safety and Corrections for the purpose of appearing and giving testimony in any proceeding for judicial review of administrative action of the Department of Public Safety and…”
Spencer v. State, Dept. of Pub. Saf., 315 So. 2d 912 (La. Ct. App. 1975).
La. Rev. Stat. § 32:668(A)(1): 3 cases
David Carver v. Louisiana Dep't of Pub. Saf., 239 So. 3d 226 (La. 2018). “R.S. 32:668 (A). If the administrative hearing officer upholds the suspension, the arrestee then has the right to appeal the decision of the administrative hearing to a judicial court.”
Musso v. Louisiana Dep't of Pub. Saf., 632 So. 2d 826 (La. Ct. App. 1994).
In re Lafleur, 129 So. 3d 540 (La. Ct. App. 2013).
La. Rev. Stat. § 32:668(A)(2): 1 case
Gray v. Louisiana Dep't of Pub. Saf. & Corr., 217 So. 3d 412 (La. Ct. App. 2017).
La. Rev. Stat. § 32:668(A)(4): 1 case
Cole v. State, Dep't of Pub. Saf., 514 So. 2d 1205 (La. Ct. App. 1987).
La. Rev. Stat. § 32:668(A)(6): 1 case
Joseph G. Richard v. State of Louisiana Deptartment of Pub. Saf. & Corr. & Off. of Motor Vehs. (La. Ct. App. 2026).
La. Rev. Stat. § 32:668(B): 4 cases
Boe v. State, 558 So. 2d 1333 (La. Ct. App. 1990). “32:667 and R.S. 32:668 plaintiff was afforded an administrative hearing at which his suspension was upheld.”
Spencer v. State, Dept. of Pub. Saf., 315 So. 2d 912 (La. Ct. App. 1975).
Dement v. Dept. of Pub. Saf. & Corr., 590 So. 2d 1333 (La. Ct. App. 1991).
McLean v. Dep't of Pub. Saf. & Corr., 572 So. 2d 1066 (La. Ct. App. 1990).
La. Rev. Stat. § 32:668(B)(1): 2 cases
Boe v. State, 558 So. 2d 1333 (La. Ct. App. 1990). “32:667 and R.S. 32:668 plaintiff was afforded an administrative hearing at which his suspension was upheld.”
McLean v. Dep't of Pub. Saf. & Corr., 572 So. 2d 1066 (La. Ct. App. 1990).
La. Rev. Stat. § 32:668(B)(1)(c): 1 case
Noustens v. State, 524 So. 2d 235 (La. Ct. App. 1988).
La. Rev. Stat. § 32:668(B)(l)(a): 1 case
King v. State, Dep't of Pub. Saf. & Corr., 742 So. 2d 44 (La. Ct. App. 1999).
La. Rev. Stat. § 32:668(C): 19 cases
Flynn v. State, Dept. of Pub. Saf. & Corr., 608 So. 2d 994 (La. 1992). “ovides for appearance fees for law enforcement officers who are "subpoenaed by the Department of Public Safety and Corrections for the purpose of appearing and giving testimony in any proceeding for judicial review of administrative action of the Department of Public Safety and…”
Boe v. State, 558 So. 2d 1333 (La. Ct. App. 1990). “32:667 and R.S. 32:668 plaintiff was afforded an administrative hearing at which his suspension was upheld.”
Millen v. State Dep. of Pub. Saf. & Corr., 978 So. 2d 957 (La. Ct. App. 2007). “When the driver requests a hearing, the state must prove the officer had "reasonable grounds" to believe the person had been driving a motor vehicle upon the public highways while under the influence of alcohol, that the person was placed under arrest and advised by the officer…”
Salassi v. State, Dept. of Pub. Saf., 684 So. 2d 1014 (La. Ct. App. 1996).
Schexnaydre v. State, Dep't of Pub. Saf. & Corr., 111 So. 3d 345 (La. Ct. App. 2012).
La. Rev. Stat. § 32:668(C)(1): 3 cases
David Carver v. Louisiana Dep't of Pub. Saf., 239 So. 3d 226 (La. 2018). “R.S. 32:668 (A). If the administrative hearing officer upholds the suspension, the arrestee then has the right to appeal the decision of the administrative hearing to a judicial court.”
In re La. Dep't of Pub. Saf. & Corr., 245 So. 3d 1075 (La. Ct. App. 2017).
Kunow v. La. Dep't of Pub. Saf. & Corr., 258 So. 3d 917 (La. Ct. App. 2018).
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.