Legal Opinion

State v. Halverson

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided October 20, 1987No. C2-87-1416PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

NORTON, Judge.

In this prosecution for DWI, the trial court suppressed the results of respondent’s urine test, based on the state’s failure to offer respondent a choice of a blood or a urine test. We reverse and remand for trial.

FACTS

On March 1, 1987, respondent was arrested for DWI. The parties stipulated there was probable cause for the arrest. Respondent was taken to the Chisago County Sheriff’s Office, where Lindstrom Police Officer Ernest McCarty read him the Minnesota Implied Consent Advisory. Respondent indicated he understood the advisory. Officer McCarty then offered respondent…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Tyler v. Commissioner of Public SafetySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
  2. Haugen v. Commissioner of Public SafetyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986
  3. State v. PittmanCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. AschnewitzCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1992
  2. STATE, CITY OF BELLE PLAINE v. StradcutterCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1997

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API