Legal Opinion
State v. Mikolinski
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided July 3, 2001No. SC 16275PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
ZARELLA, J.
The issue raised in this certified appeal is whether a sobriety checkpoint established for the purpose of detecting violations of General Statutes (Rev. to 1997) § 14-227a (a)1 violates the provisions of article first, §§ 72 or 9,3 of the constitution of Connecticut. The defendant, Christie Mikolinski, was charged with operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor in violation of § 14-227a. Before her trial to the court commenced, the defendant filed a motion to dismiss the information and a motion *545to suppress, claiming that the checkpoint at…
2Cases cited38 opinions
- Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Brown v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- United States v. Martinez-FuerteSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Michigan Department of State Police v. SitzSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- State v. GeislerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- State v. LedbetterSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2005
- State v. DavisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
- State v. JenkinsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2010
- State v. SantosSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2004
- State v. BjorklundConnecticut Appellate Court · 2003
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.