Flonnory v. State
Supreme Court of Delaware
1DissentStrine, Chief Justice
I respectfully dissent. In my view, the Superior Court grappled correctly with the precise question presented to it by the parties below: whether the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Missouri v. McNeely39 rendered Delaware’s statutory implied *1067consent statute invalid. After receiving supplemental briefs on that issue, the Superior Court determined that the Supreme Court in McNeely only addressed the question properly before it, namely “whether the natural dissipation of alcohol in the bloodstream establishes a per se exigency that suffices on its own to justify an exception to the warrant…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Schmerber v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Rochin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Bumper v. North CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Shaffer v. HeitnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.