State v. Poetschke
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HALBROOKS, Judge.
Appellant Denise M. Poetschke challenges her conviction of third-degree driving while impaired (DWI) in violation of Minn.Stat. § 169A.20, subd. 1(1), (5) (2004). Appellant argues that the district court erred in denying her motion to suppress her medical records on the basis of her physician-patient privilege. Because appellant did not waive her physician-patient privilege and because the implied-consent statute does not overcome this privilege, we reverse.
FACTS
This appeal arises from appellant’s conviction following a stipulated-facts Lothen-bach procedure. Appellant…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- State v. LothenbachSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- Marriage of Sefkow v. SefkowSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- State v. BlomSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2004
- State v. StaatSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1971
- State v. HeaneySupreme Court of Minnesota · 2004
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- State v. AtwoodSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2019