Legal Opinion

Hoban v. Rice

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 24, 1971No. 70-154PublishedCited by 103 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKrenzler, J.

In this case, we are concerned with R. C. 4511.191, the implied-consent statute, which was enacted to protect innocent motorists and pedestrians from injury and death caused by irresponsible acts of unsafe drivers on Ohio streets and highways. The broad purpose of the implied-consent statute is to clear the highways of and to protect the public from unsafe drivers.

Under the provisions of the implied-consent law, a person who operates a motor vehicle upon the public highways of this state is deemed to have consented to a chemical test to determine the alcoholic content of his blood if arrested…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Bush v. BrightCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
  2. State v. StarnesOhio Supreme Court · 1970
  3. State Department of Highways v. NormandinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1969
  4. Garcia v. Department of Motor VehiclesOregon Supreme Court · 1969
  5. Hoban v. RiceOhio Court of Appeals · 1970

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

3Cited by103 opinions

  1. State v. GustafsonOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  2. Cline v. Ohio Bureau of Motor VehiclesOhio Supreme Court · 1991
  3. Jordan v. RobertsWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1978
  4. Dolan v. RustSupreme Court of Colorado · 1978
  5. McNulty v. CurryOhio Supreme Court · 1975

98 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