Legal Opinion
William J. Holland v. Albert M. Parker, Commissioner of Motor Vehicles, State of South Dakota
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Decided October 13, 1972No. 71-1728PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HEANEY, Circuit Judge.
The plaintiff, William J. Holland, has questioned the constitutionality of South Dakota’s implied consent statute which provided:
“ * ->:■ •* Any person who operates any vehicle in this state shall be deemed to have given his consent to a chemical analysis of his blood * * * for the purpose of determining the amount of alcohol in his blood * * * provided that such test is administered at the direction of a police officer having reasonable grounds to believe such person to have been driving under the influence of alcoholic liquor and that such person has been charged with…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Schmerber v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Bell v. BursonSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Ex Parte PoreskySupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Campbell v. Superior CourtArizona Supreme Court · 1971
- People v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Holland v. ParkerDistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 1973
- Donald Snyder v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1983
- Deuter v. South Dakota Highway PatrolSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1983
- Heles v. South DakotaDistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 1982
- City of Columbia v. Paul N. Howard Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1983
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.