Justia Wyoming Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Appellant Ronald Harvey challenged an order from the district court affirming the suspension of his driver's license under state law, arguing the arresting officer lacked probable cause to justify a traffic stop. In June, 2009, Appellant was pulled over driving a forklift on the shoulder of the road. The officer cited Appellant for failing to display a "slow moving vehicle" emblem on the lift in violation of state law. While writing the ticket, the officer smelled the strong odor of alcohol coming from Appellant. The officer administered a breath test. Based on the results, the state Department of Transportation sent Appellant notice of its intent to suspend his driver's license. Appellant requested a hearing before the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH), challenging the traffic stop and the field sobriety test. The OAH upheld the suspension; Appellant appealed to the district court. The district court affirmed the OAH decision. On review of the lower court and agency decisions, the Supreme Court cited the state law Appellant argued did not exist, and affirmed the district court's decision suspending Appellant's driver's license.

Appellant Paul Mathewson, grandson of decedent Helen Nielsen, challenges the distribution of her estate. Ms. Nielsen died testate in May, 2008; her daughter Ember Mathewson (Daughter) was named executrix. Appellant is Daughter's son and the decedent's grandson. Daughter and two other siblings were named heirs, and were to receive equal parts of the estate. Prior to a final distribution, Daughter and one of the siblings died. Daughter and her husband had executed a community property agreement in which "upon the death of either [Daughter or her husband], title to all community property â¦[will] vest immediately in fee simple in the survivor." Following Daughter's death, Appellant and some of his other family members filed an application for decree of distribution to Ms. Nielsen's estate; Appellant's father claimed Daughter's share of the Nielsen estate under the terms of the community agreement. Appellant claimed he was the rightful heir to his mother's share of his grandmother's estate since the Nielsen estate had not been probated or distributed at the time of Daughter's death. The circuit court found that the Daughter's share of the Nielsen estate was subject to the community property agreement, ruling in favor of Appellant's father. On appeal, the Supreme Court found that Appellant's request for review was essentially an attempt to re-litigate issues already decided by the lower court. Furthermore, the Court noted Appellant missed the deadline to file his request for review. On the basis that his request was untimely, the Court found it had no jurisdiction to hear Appellant's arguments, and dismissed his appeal.

Appellant-Defendant Jay Gruwell was convicted on one count of sexual abuse of a minor in the third degree in violation of state law. On appeal, Appellant contends the trial court erred by excluding the testimony of one of his proposed expert witnesses, and for limiting the testimony of another. On review of the record, the Court found that the lower court excluded Defendant's expert testimony because it was not timely disclosed prior to trial. Furthermore, Defendant's second expert witness proposed testimony irrelevant to the issues being tried, and was properly limited by the trial court. As for the child witness, the Court was unable to find that the lower court abused its discretion in determining she was competent to testify. Finding no reversible errors, the Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's conviction.