With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". of the circuit court agreed with Corcoran’s due process argument related to BTO Betham and further concluded that the issue was disposi-tive of the entire proceeding. The circuit court concluded in pertinent part: A driver is entitled to request subpoenas for witnesses identified in the documents pertaining to the license suspension and has the right to present evidence relevant to the issues, to cross-examine opposing witnesses, to impeach any witness, and to rebut the evidence presented against the driver. §§ 822.2615(2) and 322.2615(6)(b), Florida Statutes (2012); Rules 15A-6.012(1) and 15A-6.013(5), Fla. Admin. Code. Also, in support of his argument, Cor-coran cites cases, Auzenne v. Dep’t of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles, 17 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1056a (Fla. 9th Cir.Ct.2010) (<HOLDING>) and Amodeo v. Dep’t of Highway Safety & Motor

A: holding that it was impermissible for an officer to question a driver about matters unrelated to the traffic stop after the officer had fulfilled the purpose of the stop by issuing a written warning to the driver
B: holding that it was error to allow a police officer who was admitted as a lay witness after a prosecution motion to admit him as an expert was denied for lack of timeliness to give testimony as to a matter about which he had no personal knowledge
C: holding that it was error for the hearing officer to refuse to issue a subpoena for the breath test operator who was a relevant witness as he had contact with the driver at or near the time of arrest
D: holding that the relevant time is the time of the employment decision
C.