City of Seattle v. Stalsbroten
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtDurham, J.
— This case presents the question of whether it is constitutionally permissible for a trial court to admit evidence that a drunk driving defendant refused to perform field sobriety tests. Specifically, we must determine whether admitting such evidence violates the defendant’s Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. Because we conclude that a defendant’s refusal to perform a field sobriety test (FST) is nontestimonial evidence that is not compelled by the State, we hold that the Fifth Amendment does not prohibit admitting such refusal evidence. Accordingly, we conclude that the Court…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Schmerber v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Fisher v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- South Dakota v. NevilleSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Pennsylvania v. MunizSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Jones v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 2008
- State v. MechamWashington Supreme Court · 2016
- City of Seattle v. StalsbrotenWashington Supreme Court · 1999
- McCormick v. Municipality of AnchorageCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2000
- State v. FermHawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals · 2000
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.