1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. N.W.2d
  4. 509 N.W.2d
  5. 509 N.W.2d 380 (1993)
 

DAVIS v. COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC SAFETY

Nos. C4-93-874, C6-93-1122, C8-93-1123, CX-93-1124, C3-93-1143, C7-93-1226, C9-93-1227, C0-93-1228, C2-93-1229, C4-93-1393, C6-93-1394.

509 N.W.2d 380 (1993)

Christine E. DAVIS, Petitioner, Appellant (C4-93-874), Jason Curtis Hawker, Petitioner, Respondent (C6-93-1122), Marlana Katherine Schmelzer, Petitioner, Respondent (C8-93-1123), Arlene Ann Lettow, Petitioner, Respondent (CX-93-1124), Scott L. Zimmerman, Petitioner, Appellant (C3-93-1143), Lloyd Dennis Iverson, Petitioner, Respondent (C7-93-1226), Jeffrey Lawrence Yorek, Petitioner, Respondent (C9-93-1227), David Gary Dopp, Petitioner, Respondent (C0-93-1228), Thomas Edward Decker, Petitioner, Respondent (C2-93-1229), Arne Marvin Berg, Petitioner, Respondent (C4-93-1393), Robert Arleigh Willetts, Petitioner, Respondent (C6-93-1394), v. COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC SAFETY, Respondent (C4-93-874, C3-93-1143). Appellant (C6-93-1122, C8-93-1123, CX-93-1124, C7-93-1226, C9-93-1227, C0-93-1228, C2-93-1229, C4-93-1393, C6-93-1394).

Court of Appeals of Minnesota.

Review Granted January 21, 1994.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Faison T. Sessoms, Jr., Minneapolis, for Christine E. Davis and Scott L. Zimmerman.

Paul B. Ahern, Froberg & Ahern, P.A., Minnetonka, for Jason Curtis Hawker.

Richard L. Swanson, Chaska, for Marlana Katherine Schmelzer, Arlene Ann Lettow, Lloyd Dennis Iverson, Jeffrey Lawrence Yorek, David Gary Dopp and Thomas Edward Decker.

James H. Leviton, Faison T. Sessoms, Jr., Minneapolis, for Arne Marvin Berg.

Howard S. Carp, Minneapolis, for Robert Arleigh Willetts.

Hubert H. Humphrey, III, Atty. Gen., Jeffrey S. Bilcik, Jeffrey F. Lebowski, Joel A. Watne, Asst. Attys. Gen., St. Paul, for Commissioner of Public Safety.

Considered and decided by ANDERSON, C.J., and PARKER, HUSPENI, CRIPPEN, SCHUMACHER, SHORT, and AMUNDSON, JJ.

OPINION

ANDERSON, Chief Judge.

These appeals were consolidated to consider related issues concerning constitutional and statutory challenges to the implied consent law. In addition, one case raises a probable cause issue, and another raises a right to counsel claim.

We uphold the implied consent law as against challenges on fundamental fairness, procedural due process, and statutory grounds. We find premature the drivers' claims that related changes...

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