Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Minkoff

Montana Supreme Court

Decided February 25, 2002No. 01-065Published

1DissentJustice Cotter

¶26 In State v. Sidmore (1997), 286 Mont. 218, 951 P.2d 558, we specifically stated that in order to support an allegation of a violation of a defendant’s due process rights, two criteria must be met. First, the defendant must have timely claimed the right to an independent blood test. Second, a law enforcement officer must have “... unreasonably impeded the defendant’s right to obtain an independent blood test.” Sidmore, 286 Mont. at 234-35, 951 P.2d at 568-69. In my judgment, neither of these criteria have been satisfied here.

¶27 First, the Court admits that Minkoff did not timely claim the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. In Re MartinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
  2. State v. SwansonMontana Supreme Court · 1986
  3. State v. WatersMontana Supreme Court · 1999
  4. State, City of Bozeman v. PetersonMontana Supreme Court · 1987
  5. State v. SidmoreMontana Supreme Court · 1997

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