Legal Opinion

State v. Micah Abraham Wulff

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided October 29, 2014No. 41179PublishedCited by 81 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BURDICK, Chief Justice.

The State of Idaho appeals the Kootenai County district court’s grant of Micah Wulffs motion to suppress evidence obtained in a warrantless blood draw. That blood draw took place after Wulff was in custody for driving under the influence. The district court held that the United States Supreme Court’s holding in Missouri v. McNeely, 569 U.S.-, 133 S.Ct. 1552, 185 L.Ed.2d 696 (2013) suggests that warrantless blood draws are not always permitted under Idaho’s implied consent statute. The State argues that McNeely was limited to the exigent circumstances exception to the…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  2. Coolidge v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  3. Schmerber v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  4. Bumper v. North CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  5. Florida v. JimenoSupreme Court of the United States · 1991

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

3Cited by81 opinions

  1. Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Myers, D.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
  2. State v. RyceSupreme Court of Kansas · 2016
  3. State of Tennessee v. Corrin Kathleen ReynoldsTennessee Supreme Court · 2016
  4. State v. JeskeIdaho Supreme Court · 2019
  5. State v. RomanoSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2017

76 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