City of Missoula v. Armitage
Montana Supreme Court
1Concurrence
Justice Laurie McKinnon,
specially concurring.
¶31 I agree with the Court’s decision to affirm the denial of Armitage’s motion to suppress. I would do so, however, on the basis that Armitage presented no credible evidence that she was coerced into taking the breath test. I believe the Court’s decision addressing the validity of the Missoula ordinances, therefore, amounts to an improper advisory opinion. Furthermore, since the Court has chosen nonetheless to express its views on the ordinances’ validity, I disagree with the *456Court’s conclusion that the ordinances, which criminalize a refusal to…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Missouri v. McNeelySupreme Court of the United States · 2013
- South Dakota v. NevilleSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- State v. WeldeleMontana Supreme Court · 2003
- Plan Helena, Inc. v. Helena Regional Airport Authority BoardMontana Supreme Court · 2010
- In Re Estate of Big SpringMontana Supreme Court · 2011
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.