Richardson v. Director of the Department of TransportationCivil No. 920190

Erickstad, Chief Justice.

Jonathan Mark Richardson appeals from an order and judgment entered by the District Court for Stutsman County affirming the administrative suspension of his driving privileges under the provisions of Section 39-20-05(2), N.D.C.C.

Our prior decisions have set forth the standard of review we utilize when examining an appeal from an administrative agency decision. That review is a three-step process containing the following factors: (1) Are the agency's findings of fact supported by a preponderance of the evidence? (2) Are the conclusions of law sustained by the agency's findings of fact? (3) Is the agency's decision supported by the conclusions of law? See Boyce v. Backes, 488 N.W.2d 45 (N.D. 1992); North Dakota Dep't of Transp. v. DuPaul, 487 N.W.2d 593 (N.D. 1992); Kummer v. Backes, 486 N.W.2d 252 (N.D. 1992); Ding v. Director, North Dakota Dep't of Transp., 484 N.W.2d 496 (N.D. 1992).

Further, our previous opinions indicate the principle we apply in determining the accuracy of a blood-alcohol test, wherein any deviation from the State Toxicologist's approved method of administering the test, which does not affect the scientific accuracy of the test results, will not invalidate the test. See Schwind v. Director, North Dakota Dep't of Transp., 462 N.W.2d 147 (N.D. 1990); Heinrich v. North Dakota State Highway Commissioner, 449 N.W.2d 587 (N.D. 1989).

Pursuant to such decisions, we affirm the judgment of the district court under Rule 35.1(a)(5) and (7), N.D.R.App.P.

Ralph J. Erickstad, C.J.
Gerald W. VandeWalle
Beryl J. Levine
Herbert L. Meschke
J. Philip Johnson