Legal Opinion

Dixon v. Commissioner of Public Safety

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided August 20, 1985No. C9-85-324PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SUMMARY OPINION

POPOVICH, Chief Judge.

FACTS

Appellant Richard Dixon was arrested for D.W.I. While transported to the police station, he talked constantly and the officer did not observe appellant put anything in his mouth. Upon arrival, he was photographed and read the implied consent advisory. He consented to a breath test. The administering officer testified he inspected appellant’s mouth prior to testing and found no foreign objects inside the mouth. Appellant testified he did not place anything in his mouth during the 15 to 20 minutes he was under observation prior to the test, including…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Nyflot v. Commissioner of Public SafetySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
  2. Tate v. Commissioner of Public SafetyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984
  3. Kooi v. Commissioner of Public SafetyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
  4. Schildgen v. Commissioner of Public SafetyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
  5. Grund v. Commissioner of Public SafetyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Hager v. Commissioner of Public SafetyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986
  2. Barna v. Commissioner of Public SafetyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1993
  3. Schwarzrock v. Commissioner of Public SafetyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986

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

Powered by the Exa API