Legal Opinion

State v. Foster

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided January 29, 1998No. 21868PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GARRISON, Presiding Judge.

The trial court sustained a “Motion In Limine” filed by Harry Don Foster (“Defendant”) in which he sought to prevent the State from introducing evidence of his alleged refusal to take a chemical breath test (“breath test”) at trial on the charge of DWI. The State appeals that decision, claiming the right to do so pursuant to § 547.200.1(2) 1 , which permits it to appeal from “any order or judgment the substantive effect of which results in ... [suppressing evidence ...”

Initially, we respond to Defendant’s Motion To Dismiss Appeal, in which he argues that the motion…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Spradling v. DeimekeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1975
  2. State v. DwyerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1992
  3. Weber v. WeberSupreme Court of Missouri · 1995
  4. Albrecht v. Director of RevenueMissouri Court of Appeals · 1992
  5. Wilmoth v. Director of RevenueMissouri Court of Appeals · 1995

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. State v. EisenhouerSupreme Court of Missouri · 2001
  2. White v. Director of RevenueMissouri Court of Appeals · 2008
  3. State v. PuckettMissouri Court of Appeals · 2004
  4. Moody v. Director of RevenueMissouri Court of Appeals · 2000
  5. Allison v. Director of RevenueMissouri Court of Appeals · 2017

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API