86-264
When a law enforcement officer is transporting a person who is considered homicidal, suicidal, or gravely disabled, what amount of force may be used in carrying out the request for transportation. ANSWER: Reasonable force. ASA 20-47-210, -213. UNOFFICIAL.
Cite as Ark. Op. Att'y Gen. 86-264
STATE OF ARKANSAS
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
201 EAST MARKHAM STREET
HERITAGE WEST BUILDING
(501) 371-2007
--\ ATTORNEY GENERAL . LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201
Opinion No. 86-624
April 1, 1988
Honorable W. Kent Ingram, Jr.
Senator
P.O, Box 369
West Memphis, AR 72301
Dear Senator Ingram:
IT have received your request for an Attorney General's
opinion concerning the extent of the State Insurance
Department's authority to implement a vehicle safety’
program. I have reviewed the material provided and will
answer your question of:
Whether the State Insurance Department has
the right to require this type of
information?
The State Insurance Department - Risk Management Office has
established a vehicle safety program with the purpose, as
stated therein, of reducing costs associated with vehicle
operations such as insurance, loss of property, injury, and
loss of employee work time. The program requests all
passengers in state vehicle use seat belts, every driver of
a personal vehicle used on state business to maintain
liability insurance on their vehicle, and employees, that
use state automobiles, release their traffic violations
record as maintained by the Department of Finance and
Administration - Office of Driver Services. The traffic
violations report will be utilized in a point system to
identify employees who may possibly be high-risk drivers.
The Honorable W. Kent Ingram, Jr.
Opinion No. 86-624
Page 2
The Risk Management Act [Act 272 of 1981, A.C.A. §23-61-602
(Supp. 1987)] (copy attached) created the Risk Management
Office within the State Insurance Department. The
legislative purpose of this act is to reduce the cost to the
state of insurance coverage and for the Risk Management
Office to analyze and make recommendations as to cost
effective loss control and safety programs for the various
state agencies. A.C.A. §23-61-602 (Supp. 1987). The act
established a Risk Manager, appointed by the State Insurance
Commissioner, with the authority to develop and promote
programs to control losses and encourage safety. A.C.A.
§23-61-605(e) (Supp. 1987). The act also gave authority to
the Risk Manager to promulgate rules and = regulations
consistent with the act. A.C.A. §23-61-607 (Supp. 1987).
It is my opinion that the vehicle safety program as
described hereinabove is within the Legislative grant of
authority given the Risk Manager by the Risk Management
Act. The Arkansas Insurance Department has been delegated
the legal authority to promulgate rules and regulations to
administer this program to control losses and encourage
safety as allowed by the Act.
You did comment .on the possibility that some of the
questions might be an invasion of personal privacy. The
United States Supreme Court has held that the right to
privacy guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment of the United
States Constitution includes only personal rights that can
be deemed "fundamental" or “implicit in the concept of
ordered liberty.” Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 93-.5.Ct. 705
(1973). I find no authority that holds driving records of a
state employee to be a fundamental right that is embodied in
the right to privacy upheld by the courts. In fact, since
in Arkansas driving a motor vehicle on a public highway is
considered a privilege and not a personal right and subject
to licensing requirements, Satterlee v. State, 289 Ark. 450,
711 S.W.2d 827 (1986), I would find it highly unlikely that
a person's driving records would rise to a level protected
by the right to privacy doctrine.
The foregoing opinion, which I hereby approve, wasS prepared
hy Assistant Attorney General Paul L. Cherry.
Singétrely,
in Unv-
st CLARK
Attormey General
SC:PLC:jr