Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
7 Iowa opinions name it 2 courts 1975–2022 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Iowa courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Charlsongreen2 sentences2010We have found the written request requirement for the withdrawal of a bodily substance for testing to be “procedural, rather than substantive in character.” Charlson, 261 Iowa at 505 , 154 N.W.2d at 833 (referring to section 321J.6 at its previous designation in section 321B.3 in the 1966 Code). 2010We have found the written request requirement for the withdrawal of a bodily substance for testing to be “procedural, rather than substantive in character.” Charlson, 261 Iowa at 505 , 154 N.W.2d at 833 (referring to section 321J.6 at its previous designation in section 321B.3 in the 1966 Code). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Fischergreen2 sentences2022We turn to whether Miller refused a chemical test. “[A]fter a written request is properly given to the driver, a finding that the test has been refused is premised on the statements and conduct of the arrestee and police officer, as well as on all the surrounding circumstances.” Fischer, 785 N.W.2d at 701 (citing Ginsberg v. Iowa Dep’t of Transp., 508 N.W.2d 663, 664 (Iowa 1993)). 2022See Fischer, 785 N.W.2d at 704 (“The written request requirement ensures an accurate and reliable record that a pretest request was made.”); see also State v. Meissner, 315 N.W.2d 738, 740 (Iowa 1982) (“This [requirement] promotes accuracy and furnishes a record for subsequent review.”). | 1 | 3 |
Ginsberg v. Iowa Department of Transportation, Motor Vehicle Divisiongreen1 sentence2022We turn to whether Miller refused a chemical test. “[A]fter a written request is properly given to the driver, a finding that the test has been refused is premised on the statements and conduct of the arrestee and police officer, as well as on all the surrounding circumstances.” Fischer, 785 N.W.2d at 701 (citing Ginsberg v. Iowa Dep’t of Transp., 508 N.W.2d 663, 664 (Iowa 1993)). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Meissnergreen1 sentence2022See Fischer, 785 N.W.2d at 704 (“The written request requirement ensures an accurate and reliable record that a pretest request was made.”); see also State v. Meissner, 315 N.W.2d 738, 740 (Iowa 1982) (“This [requirement] promotes accuracy and furnishes a record for subsequent review.”). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Binkleygreen1 sentence1975State v. Binkley, 201 N.W.2d 917, 918-919 (Iowa 1972); State v. Wallin, supra; State v. Boner, 186 N.W.2d 161 (Iowa 1971). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Iowa. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Richards
green
1 sentence1988In State v. Richards, 229 N.W.2d 229 (Iowa 1975), a trooper stopped the defendant at 11:30 in the evening and placed her under arrest for OWI. | 1 | 1988–1988 |
State v. Wallin
green
1 sentence1975State v. Binkley, 201 N.W.2d 917, 918-919 (Iowa 1972); State v. Wallin, supra; State v. Boner, 186 N.W.2d 161 (Iowa 1971). | 1 | 1975–1975 |
State v. Boner
green
1 sentence1975State v. Binkley, 201 N.W.2d 917, 918-919 (Iowa 1972); State v. Wallin, supra; State v. Boner, 186 N.W.2d 161 (Iowa 1971). | 1 | 1975–1975 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.