Legal Opinion

State v. Herrmann

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided October 2, 2002No. NonePublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KONENKAMP, Justice (on reassignment).

[¶ 1.] When an officer mistakenly requires an arrested driver to submit to a blood test because a law enforcement dispatcher erroneously reports that the driver has multiple prior convictions, should the trial court suppress the blood test results or simply deprive the prosecution of the use of the statutory presumptions? Because there was no constitutional violation here in seizing the driver’s blood, we adhere to our longstanding precedent and hold that the correct sanction for the erroneous seizure is to deny the State the use of the statutory…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Schmerber v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. South Dakota v. NevilleSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  3. State v. ZielkeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1987
  4. State v. StangaSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2000
  5. Peterson v. StateSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1977

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

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. State v. HessSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2004
  2. State v. FierroSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2014
  3. State v. DeneuiSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2009
  4. State v. BallSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2004
  5. State v. TiegenSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2008

20 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