302.301. Restricted licenses. — 1. In addition to other restrictions imposed by this chapter, upon issuance of a license, the director shall have authority, when good cause appears, to impose restrictions suitable to the applicant's driving ability and pertaining to the type or special mechanical control devices required on a motor vehicle which the applicant may operate, or such other restrictions applicable to the applicant as the director may determine to be appropriate to assure the safe operation of a motor vehicle by the applicant.
2. The director may issue either a special restricted license or may set forth the restrictions upon the usual license form. Upon receiving satisfactory evidence of any violation of the restrictions imposed pursuant to this chapter, the director may suspend or revoke the license, but the operator shall be entitled to an appeal as provided in section 302.311.
3. Any person who operates a motor vehicle in any manner in violation of the restrictions imposed in a restricted license issued to the person shall be deemed guilty of a class C misdemeanor.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
9
cases, 1963–2012 · leading case:
Wilson v. Morris, 369 S.W.2d 402 (Mo. 1963).
Wilson v. Morris, 369 S.W.2d 402 (Mo. 1963).
· cites it 2× “Upon conclusion of *406 the examination the director may allow the licensee to retain his license, may suspend or revoke the license of the licensee, or may issue to the examinee a license subject to restrictions as provided in section 302.301. The refusal or neglect of the…”
Shepherd v. Dep't of Revenue, 377 S.W.2d 525 (Mo. Ct. App. 1964).
· cites it 2× “Section 302.301 “The director” may impose restrictions on licenses.”
Haynes v. Williams, 522 S.W.2d 623 (Mo. Ct. App. 1975).
· cites it 2× “Upon conclusion of the examination the director may allow the licensee to retain his license, may suspend or revoke the li *626 cense of the licensee or may issue to the examinee a license subject to restrictions as provided in section 302.301. The refusal or neglect of the…”
Schenk v. Dir. of Revenue, 766 S.W.2d 481 (Mo. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 2× ““Upon conclusion of the examination the director may allow the licensee to retain his license, may suspend or revoke the license of the licen *483 see, or may issue to the examinee a license subject to restrictions provided in section 302.301.” § 302.291, RSMo 1986. The only…”
Thomas v. Dir. of Revenue, 136 S.W.3d 875 (Mo. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 2× “Upon conclusion of the examination, the director may allow the person to retain his or her license, may suspend, deny or revoke the person’s license, or may issue the person a license subject to restrictions as provided in section 302.301. If an examination indicates a condition…”
Trotter v. Benton, 811 S.W.2d 865 (Mo. Ct. App. 1991).
· cites it 2× “Upon conclusion of the examination, the director may allow the licensee to retain his license, may suspend or revoke the license of the licensee, or may issue to the examinee a license subject to restrictions as provided in section 302.301. The refusal or neglect of the operator…”
State ex rel. Danforth v. Lasky, 498 S.W.2d 535 (Mo. 1973).
· cites it 2× “Upon conclusion of the examination the director may *536 allow the licensee to retain his license, may suspend or revoke the license of the licensee, or may issue to the examinee a license subject to restrictions as provided in section 302.301. The refusal or neglect of the…”
Koelkebeck v. Dir. of Revenue of State, 356 S.W.3d 805 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 2× “Upon conclusion of the examination, the director may allow the person to retain his or her license, may suspend, deny or revoke the person’s license, or may issue the person a license subject to restrictions as provided in section 302.301. If an examination indicates a condition…”
Singer v. Dir. of Revenue, 771 S.W.2d 375 (Mo. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 2× “Upon conclusion of the examination the director may allow the licensee to retain his license, may suspend or revoke the license of the licensee, or may issue to the examinee a license subject to restrictions as provided in section 302.301. The refusal or neglect of the operator…”
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.