Legal Opinion

State v. Morales

Washington Supreme Court

Decided January 26, 2012No. 84197-7PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWiggins, J.

¶1 A person under arrest for vehicular assault is subject to a mandatory blood alcohol test. The suspect, however, must be given the special evidence warning that he or she will be subjected to a blood alcohol test and that he or she has the right to choose any qualified person to administer additional tests.

¶2 Prior to the mandatory blood draw in this case, Trooper Terry Brunstad asked an interpreter to read the special evidence warning in Spanish to Jose Morales. The trooper did not speak Spanish and could not verify that the warning was actually read to Morales. The interpreter was not…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Schmerber v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  3. Department of Ecology v. Campbell & Gwinn, L.L.C.Washington Supreme Court · 2002
  4. State, Dept. of Ecology v. Campbell & GwinnWashington Supreme Court · 2002
  5. Lacey Nursing Center, Inc. v. Department of RevenueWashington Supreme Court · 1995

27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Association of Washington Spirits & Wine Distributors v. Washington State Liquor Control BoardWashington Supreme Court · 2015
  2. Camicia v. Howard S. Wright Construction Co.Washington Supreme Court · 2014
  3. State v. BairdWashington Supreme Court · 2016
  4. State v. VelizWashington Supreme Court · 2013
  5. State v. FairfaxWashington Supreme Court · 2013

27 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