Legal Opinion
Spitze v. Zolin
California Court of Appeal
Decided September 9, 1996No. F024223PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
DIBIASO, J.
Vehicle Code section 23157, 1 the implied consent law (Kessler v. Department of Motor Vehicles (1992) 9 Cal.App.4th 1134, 1136 [12 Cal.Rptr.2d 46]), provides in part that any person who has been lawfully arrested for specified violations of the Vehicle Code (including, as here, § 23152) “is deemed to have given his or her consent to chemical testing of his or her blood, breath, or urine for the purpose of determining the alcoholic content of his or her blood . . . .” (§ 23157, subd. (a)(1).) The statute also authorizes the immediate seizure of the person’s license to drive…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- California Teachers Ass'n v. San Diego Community College DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1981
- Burden v. SnowdenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
- People v. McPetersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
- Morris v. County of MarinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
- California Correctional Peace Officers Ass'n. v. State Personnel BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- People v. WilliamsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
- Hildebrand v. Department of Motor VehiclesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
- Morgenstern v. Department of Motor VehiclesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003
- Ramirez v. Super. Ct.California Court of Appeal · 2023
- Vinson v. SnyderCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999