State v. Brito
Court of Appeals of Arizona
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
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Spencer v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Campbell v. Superior CourtArizona Supreme Court · 1971
- State v. SchurzArizona Supreme Court · 1993
- State v. RamosArizona Supreme Court · 1982
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- State of Arizona v. Francisco L Encinas ValenzuelaArizona Supreme Court · 2016
- State v. ParkerCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1997
- State of Arizona v. Courtney Noelle WeaklandArizona Supreme Court · 2019
- State of Arizona v. William Peter MoranCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2013
- State v. HarveyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1998
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.