State v. Moore
Oregon Supreme Court
1Concurring in the judgmentKistler, J.
After an officer stopped defendant for driving under the influence of intoxicants (DUII), he asked defendant to consent to a blood draw and also advised him of the consequences of refusing to consent. As the majority notes, the officer told defendant that, if he refused to consent to a blood draw, his driving privileges would be suspended, he would not be eligible for a hardship permit for up to a year, he would be subject to a fine, and “evidence of the refusal * * * may be offered against [him].” Having consented, defendant now seeks to suppress the results of the blood draw on the ground…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Garrity v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Missouri v. McNeelySupreme Court of the United States · 2013
- State v. NewtonOregon Supreme Court · 1981
- State v. DouglasOregon Supreme Court · 1971
- State v. MacHucaOregon Supreme Court · 2010
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.