Legal Opinion

State v. Koppi

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided March 9, 2010No. A09-136PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

SHUMAKER, Judge.

In this appeal from his conviction of second-degree refusal to submit to chemical testing, appellant argues that the district court misstated the law in its jury instructions on test refusal and that the district court violated his right to due process of law when it concluded that he had a reasonable amount of time to consult an attorney. Although we agree that the district court misstated the law, the error was harmless. And the district court did not err in deciding that the appellant had a reasonable amount of time to consult an attorney. Therefore, we affirm.

FACTS

A…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Friedman v. Commissioner of Public SafetySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1991
  2. State v. JuarezSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
  3. State v. CarlsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1978
  4. State v. KuhnauSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2001
  5. State v. BairdSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2002

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. KoppiSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2011
  2. State v. MOHOMOUDCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2010

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

Powered by the Exa API