Legal Opinion
State v. Vandergrift
South Dakota Supreme Court
Decided January 22, 1997No. NonePublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
AMUNDSON, Justice.
[¶ 1] Gail A. Vandergrift appeals from an intermediate order admitting blood test results. We reverse.
FACTS
[¶ 2] Vandergrift was charged with driving while under the influence (DUI) in violation of SDCL 32-23-1(1) or (2). She refused a blood alcohol test (BAT) after being advised of the implied consent law. A BAT was conducted for medical purposes, however.
[¶ 3] In State v. Vandergrift, 535 NW2d 428 (SD 1995) this Court held that the trial court erred in suppressing the results of Vandergrift’s BAT on the basis of South Dakota’s implied consent statutes since the purpose and…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- People v. KrauseAppellate Court of Illinois · 1995
- Oxford v. HamiltonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1989
- State v. SchroederNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1994
- State v. MastellerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1972
- State v. VandergriftSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1995
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- State v. HullingerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2002
- Beals v. Pickerel Lake Sanitary DistrictSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1998
- State v. DucheneauxSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2007
- Beals v. Pickerel Lake Sanitary DistrictSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1998
- State v. HullingerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2002
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.