What is the Burden of Proof at a DMV Hearing?

Posted on June 29, 2022

The burden of proof at a California DMV hearing is “by a preponderance of the evidence.” A preponderance of the evidence means that it is more likely than not that a person committed the violation. By contrast, prosecutors in court must prove that an accused violated a DUI law “beyond a reasonable doubt” in order to successfully secure a conviction.

A DMV DUI hearing is an administrative hearing held at a DMV office (not a criminal court). A hearing officer presides over the hearing and determines the sole issue of whether or not a person’s driver’s license will be suspended as a result of having been arrested for DUI.

A driver subject to a DMV hearing can try to retain his/her license by presenting evidence that:

• he/she was not driving a motor vehicle,
• the motorist was arrested at an illegal DUI/driver’s license checkpoint,
• the officer did not have probable cause to detain the motorist for DUI,
• the breath testing instrument used after the DUI arrest was not calibrated or was not working properly, and/or
• there were fatal flaws with the arresting officer’s paperwork.

What burden of proof does a DMV hearing officer follow?

At a Department of Motor Vehicle (DMV) DUI hearing, the DMV hearing officer must find “by a preponderance of the evidence” that the person (subject to the hearing) either operated a motor vehicle with an illegal BAC or while impaired by drugs or alcohol.

“A preponderance of the evidence” is evidence that shows that it is more likely than not that a fact is true. “More likely than not” means that it is more than 50 percent likely that a fact is true. ¹

In criminal cases, prosecutors have the burden to prove a violation of a DUI law beyond a reasonable doubt. This is much higher than “by a preponderance of the evidence” in DMV hearings.

A lower standard applies in DMV hearings because they are only civil proceedings as opposed to criminal proceedings. Therefore, it is possible for a person to lose a DMV hearing but win a DUI criminal trial.

What does a DMV hearing officer determine at the hearing?

A hearing officer, and not a judge, presides over a DMV DUI hearing. In the course of the hearing, the officer determines whether or not the DMV shall suspend a person’s driver’s license because of a DUI arrest.²

Hearing officers can decide to suspend a motorist’s license if they find that:

• the DUI stop and the arrest for the crime were legal, and
• the driver operated his/her car with a BAC of.08% or greater, or the driver refused a blood or breath test.

Note that a DMV hearing is a separate and distinct matter from a court proceeding for an alleged DUI crime.

If a person is arrested for DUI in California, the driver will face two separate legal proceedings:

1. a court proceeding for the DUI in California courts, and
2. a DMV DUI hearing.

As stated above, the DMV hearing is held to determine if the Department will suspend a person’s driving privileges.

In court, however, a judge or jury determines whether or not the defendant driver, arrested for DUI, is actually guilty of the offense. If a driver is found guilty, then he/she could be punished with a driver’s license suspension. The court, though, can also impose any of the following penalties (for a first time misdemeanor DUI):

• 3 to 5 years of informal misdemeanor probation (typically 3 years),³
• DUI school ranging from 3 to 9 months (typically 3 months),⁴
• fines and penalty assessments totaling between $1,500 and $2,000 (depending on the county),⁵
• a 6-month driver’s license suspension,⁶
• installation of an ignition interlock device (IID) for six months (unless the defendant chooses not to drive),
• up to 6 months in jail (depending on the county),
• in some counties, work release, and
• attending a victim impact panel.

How Can a Person Win at a DMV hearing?

Drivers can try to win a DMV hearing, and thereby retain their driver’s license, by raising a legal defense.

Some common defenses used in these hearings include people showing that:

• they were not driving a motor vehicle,
• the arresting officer did not have probable cause for an arrest,
• the breath testing instrument used in the case was not calibrated or was not working properly, and/or
• there were fatal flaws with the arresting officer’s paperwork.

Any of the above defenses will work if the driver can prove them by a preponderance of the evidence. Drivers can try to satisfy this standard via witness testimony, physical evidence, or documentary evidence.

---