Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion · Dissent

Lund v. Hjelle

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided December 19, 1974No. Civ. 9034Published

1Dissent

ERICKSTAD, Chief Justice.

I respectfully dissent.

The opinion written by Justice Knudson seems to indicate that one may refuse to take the test to determine the alcoholic content of his blood and reconsider any time within a period during which the test results would be valid. Our Implied Consent Law does not so provide.

Certain sections of our Implied Consent Law are pertinent to a determination of this issue:

“39-20-01. Implied Consent to determine alcoholic content of blood. — -Any *558person who operates a motor vehicle upon the public highways of this state shall be deemed to have given consent…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Kirby v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Zidell v. BrightCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
  3. Krueger v. FultonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1969
  4. Harlan v. StateSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1973
  5. State v. PetkusSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1970

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

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

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API