Skip to main content

Arthur v. State

Citations

  • 818 So. 2d 589
  • 2002 WL 727008

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • reasoning that section 322.34(5) \requires that one whose license is revoked because he is an habitual traffic offender must not drive unless or until his revocation is set aside\
  • stating that the Department’s records are “prima facie 'evidence”-that the driver committed the offenses identified in its records, and that the burden then shifts to the driver to dispute the evidence
  • stating that the Department’s records are “prima facie evidence” that the driver committed the offenses identified in its records, and that the burden then shifts to the driver to dispute the evidence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Harris

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

19 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.