Legal Opinion

State v. Stoskopf

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided May 28, 2002No. C4-01-1473Published

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

R.A. RANDALL, Judge.

Appellant challenges his conviction for driving in violation of the no-alcohol restriction on his driver’s license. Appellant argues that the results of a preliminary breath test should be suppressed because appellant was not given the implied-consent advisory before the test was administered. We affirm.

FACTS

On February 17, 2001, around 3:00 p.m., Sergeant Dean Smith of the Minnesota State Highway Patrol observed appellant Daniel Stoskopfs vehicle driving over the speed limit. Smith stopped Stoskopf a short distance later. Smith approached Stoskopfs car and smelled…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Kirby v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. State v. LothenbachSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
  3. Friedman v. Commissioner of Public SafetySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1991
  4. State v. HarrisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1999
  5. State v. MosengSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1959

4 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