As the dust settles on the United States Supreme Court’s (SCOTUS) decision in Bernard v. Minnesota, what happens to DWI cases in Minnesota? The answer mainly depends on what type of test the driver took or refused to take. Breath Tests SCOTUS gave Its stamp of approval on Minnesota’s DWI Refusal law as it applies…

The wait is over. Last Thursday, the United States Supreme Court finally decided Bernard v. Minnesota.[1] Justice Alito’s thirty-eight-page opinion for the majority can be summed up with the following: breath testing is less invasive than blood testing; therefore the states can criminalize refusing to submit to a breath test in a DWI case, but…

Only thirteen cases remain without a decision in the 2015 term for the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). To date, the Court reached decisions in sixty-eight cases. Over the next eight days, the Court will convene three times: two non-argument sessions and one conference. Many scholars believe the Court will issue any remaining…

d Why did the Minnesota Supreme Court publish an opinion on a stop issue in a routine DWI case last week in State v. Morse? Stop issues are often challenged at the district court level; and sometimes taken to the court of appeals. But the Minnesota Supreme Court? Unlike the court of appeals, it does…

“What is wrong with a Breathalyzer test when it can save lots of lives…?”[1] “[A Breathalyzer] is about as uninvasive as a search can possibly be…”[2] “Suppose you could set up a system where somebody could be reached within 10 or 15 minutes, and they would, in almost all circumstances, give a warrant.” “…[w]hat would…

Cop:                “Will you take a breath test?” Driver:            “Get a warrant.” Cop:                “I don’t need one.” Driver:            “My attorney just said you do.” Cop:                “Your attorney is wrong.” Tomorrow, the United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS) hears oral…

Recently, the House introduced two bills that would drastically increase the use of ignition interlock[1] devices across Minnesota. HF 1112 aims to require ignition interlock for all DWI offenses; and, HF 2690 would do so for all repeat DWI offenders. The latter seems more realistic, while the former is overly optimistic. Currently, Minnesota only requires drivers…

Page 3 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

© 2020 AMBROSE LAW FIRM, PLLC | ST. PAUL, MN

.

STAY CONNECTED WITH US: