Cuyahoga Falls v. Mikolajczyk
Cuyahoga Falls Municipal Court
1Opinion of the CourtQtttt.t.tn, J.
The defendant is charged with operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, contrary to and in violation of an ordinance of the City of *29Cuyahoga Falls. A jury having been waived, the defendant was tried to the court. The evidence of the City consisted of the testimony of the arresting officer, the testimony of the desk sargeant, and the “test record” of a test administered with the use of a breathalizer machine. It is the weight, if any, to be given to the results of the breathalizer test around which the case revolves.
The defendant offered the testimony of his…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Toms v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1952
- Engineers & Scientists of Milwaukee, Inc. v. City of MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
- McKay v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1950
- State v. TitakOhio Court of Appeals · 1955
- State v. DrewsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1966
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. SzefcykOberlin Municipal Court · 1963
- State v. WilsonMarion County Municipal Court · 2003