Jackson v. Shiomoto CA2/2

Filed 1/29/15 Jackson v. Shiomoto CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

ERIC JACKSON, B255797

Plaintiff and Appellant, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BS144939) v.

JEAN SHIOMOTO, as Director, etc.,

Defendant and Respondent.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. James C. Chalfant, Judge. Affirmed.

Law Offices of Duane R. Folke, Duane R. Folke for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Alicia M. B. Fowler, Assistant Attorney General, Michael E. Whitaker and Patricia A. Nevonen, Deputy Attorneys General, for Defendant and Respondent.

___________________________________________________

Appellant Eric Jackson seeks to overturn respondent director of the Department of Motor Vehicles’ (DMV) administrative decision to suspend his driving privilege. Jackson failed to submit an administrative record or other evidence that could support his petition for writ of mandate. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s decision to dismiss his petition with prejudice. BACKGROUND Jackson filed a petition for writ of mandate in September 2013, requesting that the trial court direct the DMV to stay and set aside its decision suspending his driving privilege, including his commercial driver’s license. Jackson attached the DMV’s August 2013 decision to his petition. That decision stated that in December 2012, Jackson was observed driving a motor vehicle 75 miles per hour in a 35 mile per hour zone while appearing to race another car. A police officer stopped Jackson’s vehicle. The officer observed Jackson to have bloodshot and watery eyes, an unsteady gait, and slurred speech, and the officer detected the odor of alcohol. Jackson was arrested under the charge of driving under the influence and was admonished that his driving privilege could be revoked if he failed to complete a chemical test to determine the alcohol content of his blood. According to Jackson, he provided a urine test, and the test results were negative for any illicit substances.1 According to the DMV’s decision, the arresting police officer testified that Jackson was offered a chemical test multiple times and Jackson refused. On that basis, the DMV hearing officer found that Jackson refused or failed to complete a chemical test after being requested to do so by a peace officer and ordered his driving privilege suspended.