Hannoy v. State
Indiana Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION ON REHEARING
BARNES, Judge.
In Hannoy v. State, 789 N.E.2d 977 (Ind.Ct.App.2003), we held (1) police violated Hannoy's Fourth Amendment rights when it drew his blood without complying with the implied consent statute, without seeking his actual consent, and without having probable cause that he was intoxicated; and (2) police did not violate his Fourth Amendment rights when they obtained the results of a second blood aleohol test performed by the hospital where Han-noy was taken for treatment. Both the State and Hannoy have filed petitions for rehearing in this case. We issue this…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Schmerber v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Ferguson v. City of CharlestonSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Carpenter v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2003
- Stahl v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1997
- Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District v. Chicago Southshore & South Bend RailroadIndiana Supreme Court · 1997
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Abney v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2004
- State v. EichhorstIndiana Court of Appeals · 2008
- State of Arizona v. Francisco L. Encinas ValenzuelaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2015
- Copas v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2008
- Schlesinger v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2004
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.