Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
McDonnell v. Commissioner of Public Safety
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided November 9, 1990No. C6-90-53, C7-90-224, C1-90-249, C5-90-478 and C0-90-842Published
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partWozniak, Chief Judge
I concur with the majority result as to McDonnell and Weeding. I concur with Judge Huspeni’s dissent as to Driver and McCauley. I respectfully dissent as to Moser.
Cindy Moser was read an advisory which, as to her, was an incorrect statement of the law. The majority and concurring opinions suggest the advisory’s inaccurate state*379ment did not prejudice Moser in the end result because she took the breath test. This analysis ignores the unconstitutional and fundamentally unfair coercion Moser suffered at the time the advisory was read. Therefore, I respectfully dissent from the majority’s decision…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- South Dakota v. NevilleSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Hampton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Raley v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Nyflot v. Commissioner of Public SafetySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.