Legal Opinion
Bierner v. State, Taxation & Revenue Department
New Mexico Court of Appeals
Decided March 26, 1992No. 12730, 12814PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HARTZ, Judge.
We have consolidated these two appeals on our own motion because they raise the same question: To revoke a driver’s license under the Implied Consent Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 66-8-105 to -112 (Repl.Pamp.1987), does the State have to establish that the licensee’s blood alcohol content (BAC) was at least .1 percent by weight at the time the licensee was driving? We hold that it does not. The State needs to prove only that the licensee’s BAC equaled or exceeded the statutory limit at the time the licensee took a hlood alcohol test in accordance with the Implied Consent Act.
The…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Collins v. Director of RevenueSupreme Court of Missouri · 1985
- State v. TischioSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1987
- Desmond v. Superior CourtArizona Supreme Court · 1989
- State v. KubikNebraska Supreme Court · 1990
- State v. DumontSupreme Court of Vermont · 1985
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Schwartz v. KennedyNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1995
- Maso v. State of New Mexico Taxation & Revenue DepartmentNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2004
- State v. BaldwinNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2001
- State v. SuazoNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1994
- Maso v. STATE OF NEW MEXICO TAXATIONNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2004
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.