Legal Opinion

State v. Regalado

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided March 19, 1991No. WD 43156PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ULRICH, Judge.

The State of Missouri’s interlocutory appeal, authorized by § 547.200.1(2), RSMo 1986, and Rule 30.02, contests the trial court’s order to exclude evidence of Brandon Regalado’s urine alcohol content from his trial on a charge of driving while intoxicated in violation of § 577.010, RSMo 1986. The State contends that evidence of Mr. Regalado’s urine alcohol content is admissible because his urine was collected, stored and tested in accordance with regulations adopted by Missouri’s Department of Health and his urine alcohol content presents competent evidence bearing upon the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. PetersMissouri Court of Appeals · 1987
  2. State v. HarrisMissouri Court of Appeals · 1981
  3. State v. SetterMissouri Court of Appeals · 1988
  4. State ex rel. Wilson v. HartMissouri Court of Appeals · 1979
  5. Llewellyn v. SpanglerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1905

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Young v. Director of RevenueMissouri Court of Appeals · 1992
  2. Potts v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 2000
  3. State v. RossMissouri Court of Appeals · 2011
  4. State v. CollinsMissouri Court of Appeals · 2002
  5. State of Missouri v. Richard W. MattixMissouri Court of Appeals · 2016

7 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