Legal Opinion
State v. Quinn
Court of Appeals of Arizona
Decided March 25, 2008No. 1 CA-CR 05-1123PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SNOW, Judge.
¶ 1 The State of Arizona appeals the trial court’s grant of Kati Louise Quinn’s motion to suppress blood evidence taken from her after an auto accident. For the reasons that follow, we affirm the trial court’s determination that Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) section 28-673 (2001) does not authorize the use of blood evidence in a criminal prosecution when that evidence was taken from a defendant driver without a warrant in the absence of probable cause that the driver was under the influence. We thus affirm the trial court’s suppression of the results of Quinn’s blood…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Schmerber v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Ybarra v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- National Treasury Employees Union v. Von RaabSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- City of Indianapolis v. EdmondSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- State v. PadleyCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2014
- State v. DeclerckCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 2014
- State v. OkkenCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2015
- Duff v. LeeCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2019
- Niehaus v. HuppenthalCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2013
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.