Legal Opinion

State v. Brito

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided June 6, 1995No. 1 CA-CR 93-0637PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

VOSS, Judge.

In this case we hold that a defendant charged with aggravated driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or drugs (“aggravated DUI”) is not entitled to a bifurcated trial; and that a driver does not have an unfettered right to refuse to submit to a test to determine his blood-alcohol concentration upon request by a law enforcement officer.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On November 10, 1993, Phoenix Police Officer Charles Leist, Jr. noticed a red Chevy pickup spinning its wheels on the wet pavement. The pickup stopped at an intersection for a red light, and when…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Spencer v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  3. Campbell v. Superior CourtArizona Supreme Court · 1971
  4. State v. SchurzArizona Supreme Court · 1993
  5. State v. RamosArizona Supreme Court · 1982

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. State of Arizona v. Francisco L Encinas ValenzuelaArizona Supreme Court · 2016
  2. State v. ParkerCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1997
  3. State of Arizona v. Courtney Noelle WeaklandArizona Supreme Court · 2019
  4. State of Arizona v. William Peter MoranCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2013
  5. State v. HarveyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1998

12 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