Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. DiStefano

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Decided December 20, 2000No. 99-119-C.APublished

1DissentBourcier, Justice

I would respond in the negative to questions one and two and need not answer the third question that has been certified to us from the Superior Court for the reasons hereinafter set out.

I

Certified Question 1

“In view of State v. Timms, 505 A.2d 1132 (R.I.1986), should R.I.Gen.Laws § 31-27-2(c) be interpreted to preclude, in a case involving an alleged violation of R.I.Gen.Laws § 31-27-2.2 (driving under the influence, death resulting), the admission at trial of the results of breathalyzer, blood or urine tests at trial, when the breath, blood or urine samples were seized without the…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Schmerber v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Rochin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
  3. Brown v. MississippiSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
  4. West Coast Hotel Co. v. ParrishSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
  5. Breithaupt v. AbramSupreme Court of the United States · 1957

27 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