Ekong v. Commissioner of Public Safety
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1DissentRandall, Judge
I respectfully dissent and would affirm the trial court. Minn.Stat. § 169.123, subd. 2 (1992) indicates the implied consent test shall be administered at the direction of a peace officer. I agree with the majority that an initial refusal by a driver may not be cured by the driver’s subsequent agreement to be tested. See Parsons v. Commissioner of Pub. Safety, 488 N.W.2d 500, 502-03 (Minn.1992). I also agree that a police officer is not required to offer a driver a second opportunity to be tested. Palbicki v. Commissioner of Pub. Safety, 347 N.W.2d 512, 515 (Minn.App.1984). However, Minnesota…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Palbicki v. Commissioner of Public SafetyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984
- Parsons v. Commissioner of Public SafetyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1992
- Smith v. Commissioner of Public SafetyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987
- Anderson v. Commissioner of Public SafetyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1989