Legal Opinion

State v. Stanley

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided December 18, 2007No. 1 CA-CR 06-0649PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BARKER, Judge.

¶ 1 We address in this Opinion several issues of first impression with regard to what is frequently referred to as the implied consent statute, applicable to those operating motor vehicles in Arizona and arrested for driving under the influence. Ariz.Rev.Stat. (“A.R.S.”) § 28-1321 (Supp.2006). Specifically, we consider whether requesting to consult with an attorney constitutes a refusal to take a blood test under the implied consent statute. We also consider whether a search warrant for a blood test may be issued even if the suspect has not refused to take the test. We…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. State v. MoodyArizona Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Zamora v. ReinsteinArizona Supreme Court · 1996
  3. State v. CocioArizona Supreme Court · 1985
  4. Montano v. Superior Court Pima CountyArizona Supreme Court · 1986
  5. Scottsdale Healthcare, Inc. v. Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System AdministrationArizona Supreme Court · 2003

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Montgomery v. MillerCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
  2. State of Arizona v. Robert Charles GlissendorfCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2013
  3. State of Arizona v. Luis Armando PerazaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2016
  4. Carrillo v. HouserCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
  5. State v. WeaklandCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2017

5 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