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 Utah opinions name it 2 courts 1980–2023 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Utah 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 |
|---|---|---|
Brindley v. Logan Citygreen1 sentence2023See id. 20220187-CA 8 2023 UT App 46 Brindley v. Logan City you don’t know if the test was actually performed correctly?” Supervisor responded, “I was not there but [Technician] has gone through the training and the machine pretty much does the test for you.” She confirmed that Technician administered Brindley’s second test “at 11 minutes versus 15 minutes” after the first test— referring to the timeframe for a confirmation test required by DOT when an initial test is above .02—but stated that “had it been 15 minutes versus 11 minutes there really would not have been a big difference.” ¶11 Bri | 1 | 1 |
State v. Preecegreen1 sentence2011Indeed, contrary to Defendant's assertion that subsection (1)(a) of the DUI statute creates a conclusive presumption of guilt if a person's BAC is measured at or above the proscribed level during a subsequent chemical test, Defendant remained free to "challenge the accuracy of the test on any relevant ground," State v. Preece, 971 P.2d 1, 6 (Utah Ct.App.1998) (emphasis added) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). . | 1 | 1 |
Fuenning v. SUPER. CT. IN AND FOR CTY. OF MARICOPAgreen2 sentences1988Similarly, in Fuenning v. Superior Court, 139 Ariz. 590 , 680 P.2d 121, 127 (1983), the Arizona Supreme Court found that an Arizona statute which prohibited driving with a .10% or more blood-alcohol level did not create an impermissible presumption because the defendant could attack the accuracy of the test on any relevant ground, including inherent margin of error. 1988Similarly, in Fuenning v. Superior Court, 139 Ariz. 590 , 680 P.2d 121, 127 (1983), the Arizona Supreme Court found that an Arizona statute which prohibited driving with a .10% or more blood-alcohol level did not create an impermissible presumption because the defendant could attack the accuracy of the test on any relevant ground, including inherent margin of error. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Utah. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Jeffs
green
1 sentence2015"Claims of erroneous jury instructions present questions of law that we review for correctness." State v. Jeffs, 2010 UT 49, 116 , 248 P.3d 1250 . 3 ANALYSIS T5 Karr argues that the jury instructions undermined the presumption of reasonableness he was entitled to under the defense of habitation statute 4 We reject Karr's argument but recognize that the relevant jury instruction, Instruction 86, does contain errors. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
City of Orem v. Crandall
green
2 sentences1998On the contrary, “the defendant [is allowed] to challenge the accuracy of the test on any relevant ground.” Id. at 924 . 1998Accordingly, “the defendant [is allowed] to challenge the accuracy of the test on any relevant ground.” Id. | 1 | 1998–1998 |
PHILLIPS BY & THROUGH UTAH, ETC. v. Jackson
green
1 sentence1987Id. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Nelson v. Tanner
green
2 sentences1980Defendant’s appeal on this issue must therefore fail in light of the rule stated in Nelson v. Tanner, 113 Utah 293 , 194 P.2d 468 (1948), as follows: It is well settled in this jurisdiction that if a part of an instruction is correct, and a part erroneousf,] an exception to the whole of the instruction is not well taken. 1980Defendant’s appeal on this issue must therefore fail in light of the rule stated in Nelson v. Tanner, 113 Utah 293 , 194 P.2d 468 (1948), as follows: It is well settled in this jurisdiction that if a part of an instruction is correct, and a part erroneousf,] an exception to the whole of the instruction is not well taken. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
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.