Legal Opinion
State v. Flowers
Idaho Court of Appeals
Decided March 6, 1998No. 23783PublishedCited by 114 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PERRY, Judge.
David Daniel Flowers entered a conditional guilty plea to driving under the influence (DUI), I.C. § 18-8004, after the magistrate denied his motion to suppress evidence. Flowers appealed the denial of his motion to suppress to the district court, which affirmed the decision of the magistrate. Flowers now appeals to this Court. We affirm.
I
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
Flowers was charged with DUI and filed a motion to suppress the evidence obtained as a result of the traffic stop. The only person who testified at the suppression hearing was the officer who arrested Flowers, Ross Kirtley.…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- United States v. CortezSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Delaware v. ProuseSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- State v. AtkinsonIdaho Court of Appeals · 1996
- State v. DeckerIdaho Court of Appeals · 1985
- State v. KnutsonIdaho Court of Appeals · 1991
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by114 opinions
- State v. RoeIdaho Court of Appeals · 2004
- State v. FleenorIdaho Court of Appeals · 1999
- State v. BabbIdaho Court of Appeals · 2000
- State v. DewbreIdaho Court of Appeals · 1999
- State of Idaho, Department of Transportation v. Marvin GibbarIdaho Court of Appeals · 2006
109 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.