State v. Dumas
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
KALITOWSKI, Judge
Appellant State of Minnesota challenges the district court’s dismissal of gross misdemeanor DWI and test refusal charges. Appellant asserts the district court erred in determining that Minn.Stat. § 169.121, subd. 3(c)(2), violates the Sixth Amendment right to counsel and the ex post facto clauses of the United States and Minnesota Constitutions.
FACTS
The legislature, in 1997, enacted certain amendments to the DWI and implied consent statutes. See Minn.Stat. §§ 169,121, 169.123 (1997). These amendments, in certain situations, convert misdemeanor DWI and misdemeanor…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Weaver v. GrahamSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Argersinger v. HamlinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Collins v. YoungbloodSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Nichols v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Gryger v. BurkeSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- State v. MellettCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2002
- Harrison v. Commissioner of Public SafetyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2010
- State v. BerghCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2004
- Thole v. Commissioner of Public SafetyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2013
- State v. GarciaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2003
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.