Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Vievering, 383 N.W.2d 729.

24 citing documents.

Jesse Bruce Jensen, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
(determining that an “officer need only possess ‘articulable facts’ to support [a PBT] request,” and that those facts accomplish more than just showing that the driver had consumed alcohol).1 In sum, the district court did not err in determining that the deputy had reasonable articulable su
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
review denied (Minn. May 16, 1986).
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
review denied (Minn. May 16, 1986).
John Joseph Vondrachek, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
(“An offi cer need not possess probable cause to believe that a DWI violation has occurred in order to admi nister a preliminary breath test.”), review denied (Minn. May 16, 1986).
Keith Charles Lexvold v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Keith Charles Lexvold v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(stating that an officer has the authority to administer a preliminary breath test where “specific and articulable facts” form the basis to believe that a driver is impaired); (“An officer need not possess probable cause to believe that a DWI violation has occurred in order to administer a preliminary breath test.”), review denied (Minn. May 16, 1986).
Michael John Frank v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Michael John Frank v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
26, 2009); (stating that an officer may request a preliminary breath test on the basis of “specific and articulable facts”), review denied (Minn. May 16, 1986).
Shannon Forstrom Walsh v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Shannon Forstrom Walsh v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(holding that administration of field sobriety testing based on officer’s observations of odor of alcohol and Klamar’s bloodshot and watery eyes was reasonable); d 729, 730 (Minn. App. 1986) (stating that an officer may request a PBT on the basis of specific and articulable facts), review denied (Minn. May 16, 1986).
State of Minnesota v. Christopher Gary Zurek Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Christopher Gary Zurek Minn. Ct. App. 2016
review denied (Minn. May 16, 1986); see also Heuton v. Comm’r of Pub.
Benjamin David Telschow v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Benjamin David Telschow v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
See id.; (“An officer need not possess probable cause to believe that a DWI violation has occurred in order to administer a preliminary breath test.”).
Matthew Allan White v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Matthew Allan White v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(“An officer need not possess probable cause to believe that a DWI violation has occurred in order to administer a preliminary breath test.”), review denied (Minn. May 16, 1986).
Mitchell Frank Mack v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Mitchell Frank Mack v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
1 (2014) (stating that a preliminary screening test may be given when an “officer has reason to believe” that a person is driving while impaired); (noting that administering a preliminary breath test does not require probable cause), review denied (Minn. May 16, 1986).
State of Minnesota v. Christopher Steven Pettinelli Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Christopher Steven Pettinelli Minn. Ct. App. 2014
review denied (Minn. May 16, 1986).
State v. Vonderharr 733 N.W.2d 847 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
State v. Vonderharr 733 N.W.2d 847 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
(holding that, to request PBT, officer needs only articulable facts supporting belief that DWI violation occurred, not probable cause), review denied (Minn. May 16, 1986).
Lundquist v. Commissioner of Public Safety 411 N.W.2d 608 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Lundquist v. Commissioner of Public Safety 411 N.W.2d 608 Minn. Ct. App. 1987