1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. N.W.2d
  4. 481 N.W.2d
  5. 481 N.W.2d 887 (1992)
 

STATE v. STUMPF

No. C1-91-1900.

481 N.W.2d 887 (1992)

STATE of Minnesota, Plaintiff, v. Carl Roy STUMPF, Defendant.

Court of Appeals of Minnesota.

March 24, 1992.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Hubert H. Humphrey, III, Atty. Gen., St. Paul, Paula A. Callies, Hoff & Allen, Eden Prairie, for plaintiff.

Carl Roy Stumpf, pro se.

Considered and decided by WOZNIAK, C.J., and PETERSON and AMUNDSON, JJ.

SPECIAL TERM OPINION

WOZNIAK, Chief Judge.

This certified question concerns a due process challenge to the implied consent advisory, the application of McDonnell v. Commissioner of Pub. Safety, 473 N.W.2d 848 (Minn.1991) to this prosecution, and the impeachment use of a breath test obtained in violation of due process. We answer the certified question in the affirmative in part, and in the negative in part.

...

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