Legal Opinion

State of Minnesota v. Todd Eugene Trahan

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided October 12, 2016No. A13-931PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

GILDEA, Chief Justice.

The question we are asked to decide in this case is whether Minnesota’s test refusal statute, Minn.Stat. § 169A.20, subd. 2 (2014), is constitutional as applied to respondent Todd Eugene Trahan. After Trahan was arrested on suspicion of driving while impaired, he refused to submit to a warrantless blood test. Trahan pleaded guilty to first-degree test refusal, but in postconviction proceedings, he sought to withdraw his plea, arguing that the test refusal statute was unconstitutional as applied to him. The postconviction court denied relief, and the court of…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Mincey v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. United States v. CalandraSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  3. Welsh v. WisconsinSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  4. Missouri v. McNeelySupreme Court of the United States · 2013
  5. Davis v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2011

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. State of Minnesota v. Ryan Mark ThompsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2016
  2. Johnson v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2018
  3. Parshall v. StateNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2018
  4. State v. MikeCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2018
  5. Brooks v. StateCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2017

7 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