Legal Opinion

People v. Alvarez

New York Court of Appeals

Decided November 12, 1987PublishedCited by 76 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Chief Judge Wachtler.

Defendants in these cases were arrested for drunk driving offenses in separate and unrelated incidents. In each case the police took a single breath sample using a Smith & Wesson Model 900A Breathalyzer machine, and the test indicated a blood alcohol content in excess of the legal limit (see, Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192 [1], [2]; § 1195 [2]). Defendants then moved to suppress the breathalyzer test results arguing, as they do in this court, that because the administration of the tests necessarily destroyed the breath samples, the Due Process Clause…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Bell v. WolfishSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. California v. TrombettaSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  3. People v. HobsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
  4. People v. RanghelleNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
  5. People v. KellyNew York Court of Appeals · 1984

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

3Cited by76 opinions

  1. People v. CahillNew York Court of Appeals · 2003
  2. People v. HarrisNew York Court of Appeals · 1991
  3. People v. FinneganNew York Court of Appeals · 1995
  4. People v. ScottNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
  5. People v. HayesNew York Court of Appeals · 2011

71 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