Legal Opinion

People v. Arredondo

California Court of Appeal, 6th District

Decided February 26, 2016No. H040980PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRushing, P.J.

*190Marcus Arredondo pleaded no contest to drunk driving after the trial court denied his motion to suppress the results of a blood alcohol test. The chief question in the case is under what circumstances may authorities seize a blood sample from an unconscious person suspected of drunk driving without offending the Fourth Amendment's guarantee against unreasonable searches and seizures. The trial court found that a blood extraction was permissible, without a warrant or a showing of exigent circumstances, by virtue of California's "implied consent" law, which declares that one who drives a motor…

2Cases cited65 opinions

  1. Younger v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  2. Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  4. Coolidge v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  5. United States v. LeonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984

60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Myers, D.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
  2. People v. MasonAppellate Division of the Superior Court of California · 2016
  3. Bailey v. the StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2016
  4. Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Myers, D.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
  5. Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Myers, D.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2017

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API