Jayce 1971
Active LVC Member
I screwed up last fall. Got a d.u.i., while working on the road. "Stupid"...yes, I know, especially in this economy. Anyway, a member of the local law enforcement community noticed that I was still going to work everyday...(pipeline teamster), decided he needed to chat with my boss. Told him that I no longer had a license. Flat out lie. The company let me go, wouldn't listen to my side, that I hadn't been found guilty of anything, etc. (Yes, I did immediately inform my supervisor the day after I got pulled over....he said we'd keep it between us, 'till we find something out). So, this was Nov, 08. Spoke to several ACLU attorneys about the cop coming out to my work, spreading lies. They said because I was white, and he was probably not acting on behalf of the dept, they didn't want the case....no $$'s from a ready to retire local policeman. Fine, whatever.
So today, 6-22-09, I get a letter from the Kansas DMV. They say, your license is suspended 30 days. What?!! I already had the suspension. "We're entitled to suspend your license as well. What's more, you're on restriction for 330 additional days.
This is what I have a problem with. I asked for the statute stating that once I had completed sentence (30days suspended license, South Dakota) I had to be on restriction. They gave me the KSA 8-252. I thoroughly read through this and found nothing about ADDITIONAL restrictions. It's as though KS DMV just decided to interpret the statute the way they see fit. So, I'm contacting my attorney. If they want to suspend my license for another 30 days, fine. Whatever. But a year of restrictions, when South Dakota didn't give me any more than 30 days suspended is just wrong. I think I'm going to hire an attorney for this, there has to be something they can do to get the "restricted license" thing dropped, as there is absolutely no reference to it in the statute. I know it was wrong to drive impaired, and I'm not disputing that, but the state, assuming powers it isn't entitled to is wrong. See what you think......
8-252. Suspension or revocation of resident's license upon conviction in another state; period of suspension or revocation; return of license after suspension; granting new license after revocation; exceptions. The division is authorized to suspend or revoke the driver's license of any resident of this state upon receiving notice of the conviction of such person in another state of an offense which, if committed in this state, would be grounds for the suspension or revocation of a driver's license. Any suspension or revocation of a driver's license by the division pursuant to this section shall be for a specific period of time designated in the division's order of suspension, not to exceed the period of time for which such person's privilege to drive in the other state was suspended or revoked for such offense, but in no event shall any suspension or revocation pursuant to this section exceed one year, except as provided in K.S.A. 8-2,125 through 8-2,142. The return of a person's license after the expiration of the period of any suspension hereunder, and the granting of a new license upon application of a person following the expiration of the period of any revocation hereunder, shall not be conditioned upon the restoration of such person's privilege to operate a motor vehicle by the state in which such person was convicted.
So today, 6-22-09, I get a letter from the Kansas DMV. They say, your license is suspended 30 days. What?!! I already had the suspension. "We're entitled to suspend your license as well. What's more, you're on restriction for 330 additional days.
This is what I have a problem with. I asked for the statute stating that once I had completed sentence (30days suspended license, South Dakota) I had to be on restriction. They gave me the KSA 8-252. I thoroughly read through this and found nothing about ADDITIONAL restrictions. It's as though KS DMV just decided to interpret the statute the way they see fit. So, I'm contacting my attorney. If they want to suspend my license for another 30 days, fine. Whatever. But a year of restrictions, when South Dakota didn't give me any more than 30 days suspended is just wrong. I think I'm going to hire an attorney for this, there has to be something they can do to get the "restricted license" thing dropped, as there is absolutely no reference to it in the statute. I know it was wrong to drive impaired, and I'm not disputing that, but the state, assuming powers it isn't entitled to is wrong. See what you think......
8-252. Suspension or revocation of resident's license upon conviction in another state; period of suspension or revocation; return of license after suspension; granting new license after revocation; exceptions. The division is authorized to suspend or revoke the driver's license of any resident of this state upon receiving notice of the conviction of such person in another state of an offense which, if committed in this state, would be grounds for the suspension or revocation of a driver's license. Any suspension or revocation of a driver's license by the division pursuant to this section shall be for a specific period of time designated in the division's order of suspension, not to exceed the period of time for which such person's privilege to drive in the other state was suspended or revoked for such offense, but in no event shall any suspension or revocation pursuant to this section exceed one year, except as provided in K.S.A. 8-2,125 through 8-2,142. The return of a person's license after the expiration of the period of any suspension hereunder, and the granting of a new license upon application of a person following the expiration of the period of any revocation hereunder, shall not be conditioned upon the restoration of such person's privilege to operate a motor vehicle by the state in which such person was convicted.
