Cited by

Safety, (“An assignment of error in a brief based on ‘mere assertion’ and not supported by argument or authority is [forfeited] unless prejudicial error is obvious on mere inspection.”).

Safety, (“An assignment of error in a brief based on ‘mere assertion’ and not supported by argument or auth ority is waived unless prejudicial error is obvious on mere inspection.”).

Safety, (quotation omitted).

Safety, and concluded that a driver’s due-process rights are not violated when a summary, albeit incomplete, statement of the law is accurate, the driver’s right to counsel is vindicated, and the driver consents to the test.

Safety, (rejecting argument that appellant’s consent was involuntary because the implied-consent advisory penalizes test refusals).

Safety, Magnuson v. Commissioner of Pub.

Safety, this court applied the Fourth Amendment, and not the Due Process Clause, when analyzing a driver’s claim that “she had a fundamental, due-process right to a warrant issued by a neutral magistrate.”

Safety, –46 (Minn. App. 2015).

Safety, (rejecting argument that appellant’s consent was involuntary because the ICA penalizes test refusals).

Safety, –46 (Minn. App. 2015) (stating that “[t]he question of whether an individual voluntarily consented to a search is a question of fact” and reviewing for clear error district court’s determination that petitioner voluntarily consented to warrantless urine test).

Safety, (rejecting argument that consent was involuntary because the appellant told the officers she would take the test only because the law required it).