Legal Opinion · Dissent

Davis v. Director, North Dakota Department of Transportation

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided March 5, 1991No. Civ. 900245Published

1DissentErickstad, Chief Justice

I respectfully dissent. I disagree with Justice Levine’s apparent conclusion that Officer Rumple either did not ask, or did not have the authority to ask, Davis to submit to an Intoxilyzer test at any time after he informed Davis that he was or would be charged with the offense of driving a vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor.

During his testimony at the administrative hearing, Officer Rumple, when asked by the administrative hearing officer when Davis first refused, responded, “His first refusal was out on the highway when he was in ... or about to get into one of the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Lund v. HjelleNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1974
  2. Kobilansky v. LiffrigNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Colling v. HjelleNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1963
  4. Buck v. North Dakota State Highway CommissionerNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1988
  5. Clairmont v. HjelleNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1975

1 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