State v. Rumsey
Court of Appeals of Arizona
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
VÁSQUEZ, Presiding Judge.
¶ 1 In this opinion we address whether the trial court erred by not suppressing evidence of blood-test results after concluding the defendant’s right to counsel had been violated at the time the blood draw occurred. For the reasons that follow, we conclude the court did not so err and affirm its ruling on that issue. 1
Facts and Procedure
112 We view the facts in the light most favorable to sustaining the jury’s verdicts. State v. Miles, 211 Ariz. 475, ¶ 2, 123 P.3d 669, 670 (App.2005). On the evening of January 12, 2008, J. and O. were riding their bicycles in…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Wong Sun v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Nardone v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Herring v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- State v. MoodyArizona Supreme Court · 2004
- State v. BoltArizona Supreme Court · 1984
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- State v. PenneyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2012
- State of Arizona v. Esgardo Javier NevarezCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
- State of Arizona v. Luis Armando PerazaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2016
- Reyes v. Hon mcclennen/stateCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2016
- State v. StempelCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2026