Legal Opinion

State v. Haner

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided December 9, 1941No. 45573PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Stiger, J.—

I. Defendant consented to a blood test

His first assignment of error is that the court erred in overruling his objections to questions propounded to Dr. Charles Fee, the physician who made the blood test. This witness qualified as an expert on the subject of intoxication and blood tests. He used the Widmark method in determining the amount of alcohol present in a specimen of defendant’s blood.

He testified that he found 400 milligrams of alcohol per 100 c. c. of blood, and, that in his opinion, a person with that much alcohol in his blood was intoxicated.

The witness further testified:

2Cited by18 opinions

  1. Breithaupt v. AbramSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  2. Toms v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1952
  3. State v. WallinSupreme Court of Iowa · 1972
  4. Schutt v. MacduffNew York Supreme Court · 1954
  5. Rigby v. EastmanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1974

13 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