Kling v. Dir., N.D. Dep't of Transp.

943 N.W.2d 480 (Mem)

Jeffrey Darnell KLING, Petitioner and Appellant

v.DIRECTOR, NORTH DAKOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Respondent and Appellee

No. 20200024

Supreme Court of North Dakota.

Filed June 2, 2020

Michael R. Hoffman, Bismarck, ND, for petitioner and appellant; submitted on brief.

Michael T. Pitcher, Assistant State’s Attorney, Bismarck, ND, for respondent and appellee; submitted on brief

Per Curiam.

[¶1] Jeffrey Kling appeals from a district court judgment affirming an administrative suspension of his driving privileges for a period of 91 days. On appeal, Kling argues to authenticate the report and notice form, the specifics of the implied consent advisory must be testified to, to comply with N.D.C.C. § 39-20-01(3)(a). This Court has said "[a] Department’s Report and Notice form is admissible as prima facie evidence of its contents once it is forwarded to the director of the Department." Gillmore v. Levi , 2016 ND 77, ¶ 12, 877 N.W.2d 801. Kling bears the burden to rebut the prima facie evidence in the report and notice form. Id. Kling failed to testify or otherwise rebut the evidence that he was read the implied consent advisory as required by law. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.35.1(a)(7).

[¶2] Jon J. Jensen, C.J.

Lisa Fair McEvers

Gerald W. VandeWalle

Jerod E. Tufte

Daniel J. Crothers