The state Supreme Court is deciding whether a suspected drunken driver can be convicted of refusing to take a breath test where the arresting officer gave him inaccurate information about the possible length of license suspension.
An appeals court had said no in State v. O’Driscoll, A-7-12, finding that whether or not the driver would have been more inclined to consent to the test had he received correct information was irrelevant. On Monday, the state argued that the officer’s deviation from the actual state of the law was minor.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
