Legal Opinion

State Ex Rel. Pennartz v. Olcavage

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided August 30, 2001No. 1 CA-SA 01-0130PublishedCited by 43 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

RYAN, Judge.

¶ 1 In this special action, we are asked to decide whether persons who have received specific training in phlebotomy, 1 who are certified in phlebotomy by two national certification agencies, and who have performed numerous blood draws are legally “qualified” to perform blood draws for purposes of determining the alcohol concentration or drug content in a suspect’s blood under Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) section 28-1388(A) (Supp.2000). A Scottsdale City Court judge ruled that phlebotomists were not qualified persons under the statute unless they drew blood under the…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Schmerber v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. State v. TrostleArizona Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Martin v. ReinsteinCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1999
  4. State v. TarangoArizona Supreme Court · 1996
  5. State v. NihiserCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1997

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

3Cited by43 opinions

  1. ChartOne, Inc. v. BerniniCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2004
  2. Steinberger v. McVeyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
  3. Bergeron Ex Rel. Perez v. O'NEILCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2003
  4. Roman Catholic Diocese v. Superior CourtCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2003
  5. Slade v. SchneiderCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2006

38 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