Legal Opinion

State v. Lee

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided November 28, 1995No. 1 CA-CR 94-0459PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

GARBARINO, Judge.

The State appeals the trial court’s order suppressing the results of field sobriety tests and evidence of the refusal by Marilyn Lee (defendant) to take an intoxilyzer test. According to the State, the arresting officer was not required to give post-arrest Miranda 1 warnings to defendant prior to requesting that she perform field sobriety tests or prior to requesting that she submit to an intoxilyzer test. We affirm the trial court’s suppression of any post-arrest statements. However, we decline to address the admissibility of defendant’s pre-arrest statements because…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Schmerber v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  3. South Dakota v. NevilleSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  4. Pennsylvania v. MunizSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  5. Campbell v. Superior CourtArizona Supreme Court · 1971

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State v. SpreitzArizona Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Tornabene v. Bonine Ex Rel. Arizona Highway DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2002
  3. Wyatt v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2003
  4. State v. GainesCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1997
  5. State v. AcostaCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1997

2 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