Culver v. Levi

¶1Filed 2/12/15 by Clerk of Supreme Court

¶2IN THE SUPREME COURT

¶3STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

¶4

¶5

¶6

¶72015 ND 26

¶8

¶9

¶10

¶11Corey Culver, Petitioner and Appellant

¶12

¶13v.

¶14

¶15Grant Levi, Director of the North

¶16Dakota Department of Transportation, Respondent and Appellee

¶17

¶18

¶19

¶20No. 20140195

¶21

¶22

¶23

¶24Appeal from the District Court of Stark County, Southwest Judicial District, the Honorable William A. Herauf, Judge.

¶25

¶26AFFIRMED.

¶27

¶28Per Curiam.

¶29

¶30Thomas F. Murtha IV, P.O. Box 1111, Dickinson, N.D. 58602-1111, for petitioner and appellant; on brief.

¶31

¶32Michael T. Pitcher, Office of Attorney General, 500 North 9th Street, Bismarck, N.D. 58501-4509, for respondent and appellee; on brief.

¶33Culver v. Levi

¶34No. 20140195

¶35

¶36Per Curiam.

¶37[¶1] Corey Culver appeals from a judgment affirming a decision of the Department of Transportation to suspend his driving privileges for 91 days.  Culver argues he was coerced into giving consent to the breath tests by the law enforcement officer’s reading of the implied consent advisory.  We have rejected this argument in State v. Smith , 2014 ND 152, 849 N.W.2d 599, and McCoy v. North Dakota Dep’t of Transp. , 2014 ND 119, 848 N.W.2d 659.  Culver’s argument that the implied consent laws violate the Fourth Amendment and N.D. Const. art. I, § 8, was rejected in State v. Birchfield , 2015 ND 6.  Culver’s argument that the implied consent laws violate the unconstitutional conditions doctrine was rejected in Beylund v. Levi , 2015 ND 18.  We summarily affirm the judgment under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7).

¶38[¶2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

¶39Dale V. Sandstrom

¶40Daniel J. Crothers

¶41Lisa Fair McEvers

¶42Carol Ronning Kapsner