1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. N.W.2d
  4. 493 N.W.2d
  5. 493 N.W.2d 599 (1992)
 

STATE v. FORTMAN

No. C7-92-1166.

493 N.W.2d 599 (1992)

STATE of Minnesota, City of New Ulm, Respondents, v. Karl Robert FORTMAN, Appellant.

Court of Appeals of Minnesota.

December 15, 1992.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Richard L. Swanson, Chaska, for appellant.

Hubert H. Humphrey, III, Atty. Gen., St. Paul, and Hugh T. Nierengarten, New Ulm City Atty., New Ulm, for respondents.

Considered and decided by ANDERSON, C.J., and KALITOWSKI and HARTEN, JJ.

OPINION

KALITOWSKI, Judge.

Appellant Karl Robert Fortman challenges his conviction for driving while under the influence of alcohol on the grounds that his constitutional right to counsel was violated when the Intoxilyzer malfunctioned and the entire implied consent advisory was not reread to him prior to obtaining an alternate sample.

FACTS

In July 1991, a New Ulm police officer stopped appellant's vehicle for speeding. Based upon the...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases