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.
6 Alabama opinions name it 2 courts 1979–1999 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Alabama 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 |
|---|---|---|
Duckworth v. Stategreen2 sentences1979I would agree with the Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, stated in Duckworth v. State , 309 P.2d 1103 (1957), that refusal to take the intoximeter test is not probative, and is productive of nothing more than speculation, surmise, and innuendo. 1979See Duckworth v. State, 309 P.2d 1103 (Okl.Crim.App.1957) ("The refusal to take the intoximeter test constitutes what might be termed a negative predicate which was productive of nothing more than sheer speculation, surmise, and innuendo"). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Moore v. State
green
2 sentences1999Thus, blood alcohol test results may be admissible under the statute if the officer who performed the inspection testifies that the device was properly calibrated. "`In Ex parte Mayo , the Alabama Supreme Court set out an alternate method for establishing the necessary predicate for the introduction of I-5000 results: "`"To establish a predicate for admitting the test results, without reliance on the statute [§ 32-5A-194 , Ala. Code 1975], there should be evidence that: "`"(1) the theory underlying the photoelectric intoximeter test is valid and generally accepted as such; "`"(2) the intoximet 1997In Ex parte Mayo , the Alabama Supreme Court set out an alternate method for establishing the necessary predicate for the introduction of I-5000 results: "To establish a predicate for admitting the test results, without reliance on the statute [§ 32-5A-194 , Ala. Code 1975], there should be evidence that: "(1) the theory underlying the photoelectric intoximeter test is valid and generally accepted as such; "(2) the intoximeter is a reliable instrument and is generally accepted as such; "(3) the intoximeter test was administered by a qualified individual who could properly conduct the test and | 4 | 1987–1999 |
Mayo v. City of Madison
green
2 sentences1997"In Ex parte Mayo , the Alabama Supreme Court set out an alternate method for establishing the necessary predicate for the introduction of I-5000 results: " 'To establish a predicate for admitting the test results, without reliance on the statute [§ 32-5A-194 , Ala. Code 1975], there should be evidence that: " '(1) the theory underlying the photoelectric intoximeter test is valid and generally accepted as such; " '(2) the intoximeter is a reliable instrument and is generally accepted as such; " '(3) the intoximeter test was administered by a qualified individual who could properly conduct the 1997In Ex parte Mayo , the Alabama Supreme Court set out an alternate method for establishing the necessary predicate for the introduction of I-5000 results: "To establish a predicate for admitting the test results, without reliance on the statute [§ 32-5A-194 , Ala. Code 1975], there should be evidence that: "(1) the theory underlying the photoelectric intoximeter test is valid and generally accepted as such; "(2) the intoximeter is a reliable instrument and is generally accepted as such; "(3) the intoximeter test was administered by a qualified individual who could properly conduct the test and | 2 | 1997–1997 |
Estes v. State
green
1 sentence1983This is not a case in which independent proof of intoxication was so overwhelming as to bring it into the ambit of Estes v. State , 358 So.2d 1050 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977), cert. denied, 358 So.2d 1057 (Ala. 1978). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Estes v. State
green
1 sentence1983This is not a case in which independent proof of intoxication was so overwhelming as to bring it into the ambit of Estes v. State , 358 So.2d 1050 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977), cert. denied, 358 So.2d 1057 (Ala. 1978). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
People v. McGinnis
green
2 sentences1979In People v. McGinnis, 123 Cal.App.2d Supp. 945 , 267 P.2d 458 (1953), defendant was convicted for driving while intoxicated, and evidence was admitted at trial of his refusal to submit to an intoximeter test. 1979In People v. McGinnis , 123 Cal.App.2d Supp. 945 , 267 P.2d 458 (1953), defendant was convicted for driving while intoxicated, and evidence was admitted at trial of his refusal to submit to an intoximeter test. | 1 | 1979–1979 |
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.