Hoekstra v. Commissioner of Public Safety
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SCHELLHAS, Judge.
Appellant challenges his driver’s hcense revocation, arguing that the police lacked a reasonable, articulable suspicion to justify a traffic stop under Minn.Stat. § 169.64, subd. 10(a)(2). We affirm.
FACTS
Appellant Joseph Hoekstra pleaded guilty to fourth-degree driving while impaired under Minn.Stat. § 169A.20, subd. 1(1) (2010), and the district court convicted him of that offense. Respondent Minnesota Commissioner of Public Safety disqualified Hoekstra from holding a commercial driver’s hcense, and Hoekstra petitioned for judicial review, arguing that his…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Berge v. Commissioner of Public SafetySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
- State v. DiedeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2011
- Ascher v. Commissioner of Public SafetySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1994
- State v. GeorgeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
- State v. RickSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2013
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- State of Minnesota v. Carl Douglas SmithCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2024