Carpenter v. Vermont Department of Motor Vehicles

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that statute is not retrospective “because some of the requisites for its action are drawn from a time antecedent to its passage”; question is whether it affects rights existing prior to enactment (quotation omitted)
• once court finds reasonable basis for request to submit to a breath test, it has no discretion in refusal case; suspension follows purely by administrative action
• “The statute neither impaired vested rights nor imposed new duties.”; statutory scheme therefore not retrospective and due process not violated
• Legislature has the power to enact a law which would operate retrospectively from its effective date
• retroactive laws defined as those that take away or impair vested rights acquired under existing laws, or create new obligation, impose new duty, or attach new disability with respect to past transactions
• “[T]he essential inquiry is whether ‘the act which triggers application of the amended statute occurs after the effective date of the amended statute.’” (quoting Nix v. Tice, 44 Colo.App. 42, 607 P.2d 399, 400 (1980))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).