Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State of Minnesota v. David Ray Bennett, 867 N.W.2d 539.

35 citing documents.

Felix Kasper Piah, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
1 n.1 (Minn. App. 2015), rev. denied (Minn. Oct.
Brandyn Brett Phillips, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Next, “it is well-established that the respondent on appeal in a criminal case may present to this court an alternative reason for affirming the district court, if the alternative reason is permitted by both the law and the factual record and would not expand the relief granted.” n.1 (Minn. App. 2015) (citing Minn. R. Crim.
State of Minnesota v. Gregory Allen Olson 887 N.W.2d 692 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Keith Charles Lexvold v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Kevin Charles Owens Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Gregory Allen Olson 887 N.W.2d 692 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
review denied (Minn. Oct.
State of Minnesota v. Kevin Charles Owens Minn. Ct. App. 2016
warrantless [breath tests] comport with the Fourth Amendment, it follows that a State may criminalize the refusal to comply with a demand to submit to the required 10 testing,” and concluding that a warrantless breath test is a permissible search incident to a lawful arrest for DWI); (concluding that “[appellant] cannot proceed with his claim that the [test]-refusal statute violates the unconstitutional-conditions doctrine,” reasoning that “[t]he warrantless breath test that [appellant] refused
Keith Charles Lexvold v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
review denied (Minn. Oct.
State of Minnesota v. Wallace Alery Christopher Obey Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Wallace Alery Christopher Obey Minn. Ct. App. 2016
review denied (Minn. Oct.
State of Minnesota v. Xa Vang Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Xa Vang Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In any event, we note that even if the constitutionality of the test-refusal statute had been properly raised, Vang’s due-process argument would fail in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Birchfield v. North Dakota, 136 S. Ct. 2160 (2016), review denied (Minn. Oct.
Richard Lee Zimmerman v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Richard Lee Zimmerman v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
review denied (Minn. Oct.
Michael Paul Tulenchek-Armstrong v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Michael Paul Tulenchek-Armstrong v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
To the extent that appellant argues that the test-refusal statute violates the unconstitutional-conditions doctrine, we recently held that “Minnesota’s test-refusal statute does not violate the unconstitutional-conditions doctrine by imposing a criminal penalty on a person who has been arrested for driving while impaired and has refused to submit to a breath test.” review denied (Minn. Oct.
Michael John Frank v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Michael John Frank v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
13 review denied (Minn. Oct.
Marsha Katherine Millonig v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Marsha Katherine Millonig v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“Minnesota’s test-refusal statute does not violate the unconstitutional- conditions doctrine by imposing a criminal penalty on a person who has been arrested for driving while impaired and has refused to submit to a breath test.” review denied (Minn. Oct.
State of Minnesota v. Arnold Lee Scott Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Arnold Lee Scott Minn. Ct. App. 2016
review denied (Minn. Oct.
State of Minnesota v. Michael Peter Beard Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Michael Peter Beard Minn. Ct. App. 2016
d 539, 542-43 (Minn. App. 2015) review denied (Minn. Oct.
State of Minnesota v. Aamir Karmoeddien Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Aamir Karmoeddien Minn. Ct. App. 2015
pels the surrender of the constitutional right to withhold consent to a warrantless search as a condition of driving.” This court recently held that “Minnesota’s test-refusal statute does not violate the unconstitutional-conditions doctrine by imposing a criminal penalty on a person who has been arrested for driving while impaired and has refused to submit to a breath test.” d 539, 540 (Minn. App. July 27, 2015).
State of Minnesota v. David Lee Clifton Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. David Lee Clifton Minn. Ct. App. 2015
-43 (Minn. App. 2015), review denied (Minn. Oct.
State of Minnesota v. Jeffrey Travis Elledge Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Jeffrey Travis Elledge Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Moreover, we held that the test-refusal statute does not violate the unconstitutional-conditions doctrine.
State of Minnesota v. Curtis Leroy Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Curtis Leroy Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Nonetheless, “the respondent on appeal in a criminal case may present to this court an alternative reason for affirming the district court, if the alternative reason is permitted by both the law and the factual record and would not expand the relief granted.” n.1 (Minn. App. 2015) ( (applying Minn. R. Crim.
State of Minnesota v. Steven Joseph Mahne Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Peter Alan Krech v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
constitutional right to withhold consent to a warrantless search as a condition of driving.” This court recently held that “Minnesota’s test-refusal statute does not violate the unconstitutional-conditions doctrine by imposing a criminal penalty on a person who has been arrested for driving while impaired and has refused to submit to a breath test.” State v. Bennett, ___ N.W.2d ___, ___, slip op.
Ryan John Nordell v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Fourth Amendment State v. Bennett, ___ N.W.2d ___, ___, slip op.