46 Idaho opinions name it 2 courts 1971–2025 3 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Idaho 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 |
|---|---|---|
Schmerber v. Californiagreen2 sentences2016“Requiring that a person submit to a blood alcohol test is a search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I Section 17 of the Idaho Constitution.” Wulff, 157 Idaho at 418 , 337 P.3d at 577 (citing Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757, 767 , 86 S.Ct. 1826, 1834 , 16 L.Ed.2d 908, 917-18 (1966); State v. Diaz, 144 Idaho 300, 302 , 160 P.3d 739, 741 (2007)). “ ‘Like the Fourth Amendment, the purpose of Art. 2016“Requiring that a person submit to a blood alcohol test is a search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I Section 17 of the Idaho Constitution.” Wulff, 157 Idaho at 418 , 337 P.3d at 577 (citing Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757, 767 , 86 S.Ct. 1826, 1834 , 16 L.Ed.2d 908, 917-18 (1966); State v. Diaz, 144 Idaho 300, 302 , 160 P.3d 739, 741 (2007)). “ ‘Like the Fourth Amendment, the purpose of Art. | 12 | 14 |
State v. Diazred2 sentences2016“Requiring that a person submit to a blood alcohol test is a search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I Section 17 of the Idaho Constitution.” Wulff, 157 Idaho at 418 , 337 P.3d at 577 (citing Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757, 767 , 86 S.Ct. 1826, 1834 , 16 L.Ed.2d 908, 917-18 (1966); State v. Diaz, 144 Idaho 300, 302 , 160 P.3d 739, 741 (2007)). “ ‘Like the Fourth Amendment, the purpose of Art. 2016“Requiring that a person submit to a blood alcohol test is a search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I Section 17 of the Idaho Constitution.” Wulff, 157 Idaho at 418 , 337 P.3d at 577 (citing Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757, 767 , 86 S.Ct. 1826, 1834 , 16 L.Ed.2d 908, 917-18 (1966); State v. Diaz, 144 Idaho 300, 302 , 160 P.3d 739, 741 (2007)). “ ‘Like the Fourth Amendment, the purpose of Art. | 7 | 7 |
State v. Micah Abraham Wulffgreen2 sentences2022“Requiring that a person submit to a blood alcohol test is a search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution . . . .” State v. Wulff, 157 Idaho 416, 418 , 337 P.3d 575, 577 (2014). 2022“Requiring that a person submit to a blood alcohol test is a search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution . . . .” State v. Wulff, 157 Idaho 416, 418 , 337 P.3d 575, 577 (2014). | 6 | 10 |
State v. Curtisgreen2 sentences2014The Court said, “[A] refusal to take a blood-alcohol test, after a police officer has lawfully requested it, is not an act coerced by the officer, and thus is not protected by the privilege against self-incrimination.” Id. at 564 , 103 S.Ct. 916 ; see also State v. Curtis, 106 Idaho 483, 489 , 680 P.2d 1383, 1389 (Ct.App.1984). 2014The Court said, “[A] refusal to take a blood-alcohol test, after a police officer has lawfully requested it, is not an act coerced by the officer, and thus is not protected by the privilege against self-incrimination.” Id. at 564 , 103 S.Ct. 916 ; see also State v. Curtis, 106 Idaho 483, 489 , 680 P.2d 1383, 1389 (Ct.App.1984). | 3 | 5 |
State v. Harmongreen2 sentences2020Moreover, in South Dakota v. Neville, 459 U.S. 553 (1983), the Supreme Court stated, “In the context of an arrest for driving while intoxicated, a police inquiry of whether the suspect will take a blood-alcohol test is not an interrogation within the meaning of Miranda.” Harmon, 131 Idaho at 84-85 , 952 P.2d at 406-07 (internal citations omitted). 2020Moreover, in South Dakota v. Neville, 459 U.S. 553 (1983), the Supreme Court stated, “In the context of an arrest for driving while intoxicated, a police inquiry of whether the suspect will take a blood-alcohol test is not an interrogation within the meaning of Miranda.” Harmon, 131 Idaho at 84-85 , 952 P.2d at 406-07 (internal citations omitted). | 3 | 3 |
State v. Wooleryred2 sentences2007Halen v. State, 136 Idaho 829, 833 , 41 P.3d 257, 261 (2002) (citing Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757, 767 , 86 S.Ct. 1826, 1834 , 16 L.Ed.2d 908, 917-18 (1966); State v. Woolery, 116 Idaho 368, 370 , 775 P.2d 1210, 1212 (1989)). 2007Halen v. State, 136 Idaho 829, 833 , 41 P.3d 257, 261 (2002) (citing Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757, 767 , 86 S.Ct. 1826, 1834 , 16 L.Ed.2d 908, 917-18 (1966); State v. Woolery, 116 Idaho 368, 370 , 775 P.2d 1210, 1212 (1989)). | 3 | 3 |
State v. Knollgreen2 sentences1992Knoll, 110 Idaho at 681 , 718 P.2d at 592 . 1992Knoll, 110 Idaho at 681 , 718 P.2d at 592 . | 2 | 3 |
State v. DeWittgreen2 sentences2014State v. DeWitt, 145 Idaho 709, 713 , 184 P.3d 215, 219 (Ct.App.2008) (“Indeed, from the odor of alcohol and presence of beer cans in his vehicle, there was ample evidence that DeWitt had been driving under the influence at the time of the accident.”); State v. Curtis, 106 Idaho 483, 489 , 680 P.2d 1383, 1389 (Ct.App.1984) (full and empty beer cans and the strong odor of alcohol). 2014State v. DeWitt, 145 Idaho 709, 713 , 184 P.3d 215, 219 (Ct.App.2008) (“Indeed, from the odor of alcohol and presence of beer cans in his vehicle, there was ample evidence that DeWitt had been driving under the influence at the time of the accident.”); State v. Curtis, 106 Idaho 483, 489 , 680 P.2d 1383, 1389 (Ct.App.1984) (full and empty beer cans and the strong odor of alcohol). | 1 | 2 |
Matter of Griffithsgreen2 sentences1988The issue here differs from that addressed in State v. Griffiths, 113 Idaho 364 , 744 P.2d 92 (1987). 1988The issue here differs from that addressed in State v. Griffiths, 113 Idaho 364 , 744 P.2d 92 (1987). | 1 | 2 |
State v. Bellgreen2 sentences2016State v. Bell, 115 Idaho 36, 39 , 764 P.2d 113, 116 (Ct. App. 1988). 2016State v. Bell, 115 Idaho 36, 39 , 764 P.2d 113, 116 (Ct. App. 1988). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Holtongreen2 sentences2016I, § 17 is to protect Idaho citizens’ reasonable expectation of privacy against arbitrary governmental intrusion.’ ” Id. (quoting State v. Holton, 132 Idaho 501, 503 , 975 P.2d 789, 791 (1999)). 2016I, § 17 is to protect Idaho citizens’ reasonable expectation of privacy against arbitrary governmental intrusion.’ ” Id. (quoting State v. Holton, 132 Idaho 501, 503 , 975 P.2d 789, 791 (1999)). | 1 | 1 |
Kane v. State, Department of Transportationgreen2 sentences2012As we stated in Kane, 139 Idaho at 590 , 83 P.3d at 134 (emphasis in original): Kane’s second contention is that because of their nonconformity with certain requirements of the statutes and regulations, the documents sent by Officer Erickson did not prove legal cause to stop his car or prove that the blood alcohol test was properly administered. 2012As we stated in Kane, 139 Idaho at 590 , 83 P.3d at 134 (emphasis in original): Kane’s second contention is that because of their nonconformity with certain requirements of the statutes and regulations, the documents sent by Officer Erickson did not prove legal cause to stop his car or prove that the blood alcohol test was properly administered. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Scheversgreen2 sentences2010State v. Valdez-Molina, 127 Idaho 102, 106 , 897 P.2d 993, 997 (1995); State v. Schevers, 132 Idaho 786, 789 , 979 P.2d 659, 662 (Ct. App. 1999). 2 The state’s administration of a blood alcohol test constitutes a search and seizure of a person under the Fourth Amendment and Article 1, Section 17 of the Idaho Constitution. 2010State v. Valdez-Molina, 127 Idaho 102, 106 , 897 P.2d 993, 997 (1995); State v. Schevers, 132 Idaho 786, 789 , 979 P.2d 659, 662 (Ct. App. 1999). 2 The state’s administration of a blood alcohol test constitutes a search and seizure of a person under the Fourth Amendment and Article 1, Section 17 of the Idaho Constitution. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Valdez-Molinagreen2 sentences2010State v. Valdez-Molina, 127 Idaho 102, 106 , 897 P.2d 993, 997 (1995); State v. Schevers, 132 Idaho 786, 789 , 979 P.2d 659, 662 (Ct. App. 1999). 2 The state’s administration of a blood alcohol test constitutes a search and seizure of a person under the Fourth Amendment and Article 1, Section 17 of the Idaho Constitution. 2010State v. Valdez-Molina, 127 Idaho 102, 106 , 897 P.2d 993, 997 (1995); State v. Schevers, 132 Idaho 786, 789 , 979 P.2d 659, 662 (Ct. App. 1999). 2 The state’s administration of a blood alcohol test constitutes a search and seizure of a person under the Fourth Amendment and Article 1, Section 17 of the Idaho Constitution. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Worthingtongreen2 sentences2008Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757, 767 , 86 S.Ct. 1826, 1834 , 16 L.Ed.2d 908, 917 (1966); State v. Worthington, 138 Idaho 470, 472 , 65 P.3d 211, 213 (Ct.App.2002). 2008Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757, 767 , 86 S.Ct. 1826, 1834 , 16 L.Ed.2d 908, 917 (1966); State v. Worthington, 138 Idaho 470, 472 , 65 P.3d 211, 213 (Ct.App.2002). | 1 | 1 |
Halen v. Stategreen2 sentences2007Halen v. State, 136 Idaho 829, 833 , 41 P.3d 257, 261 (2002) (citing Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757, 767 , 86 S.Ct. 1826, 1834 , 16 L.Ed.2d 908, 917-18 (1966); State v. Woolery, 116 Idaho 368, 370 , 775 P.2d 1210, 1212 (1989)). 2007Halen v. State, 136 Idaho 829, 833 , 41 P.3d 257, 261 (2002) (citing Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757, 767 , 86 S.Ct. 1826, 1834 , 16 L.Ed.2d 908, 917-18 (1966); State v. Woolery, 116 Idaho 368, 370 , 775 P.2d 1210, 1212 (1989)). | 1 | 1 |
Deen v. Stategreen2 sentences2006For example, in Deen v. State, 131 Idaho 435, 436 , 958 P.2d 592, 593 (1998), an appeal from an order suspending Deen’s driver’s license for refusal to take a blood alcohol test, the question presented was whether the officer had been justified in stopping Deen’s car. 2006For example, in Deen v. State, 131 Idaho 435, 436 , 958 P.2d 592, 593 (1998), an appeal from an order suspending Deen’s driver’s license for refusal to take a blood alcohol test, the question presented was whether the officer had been justified in stopping Deen’s car. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Nickersongreen2 sentences2002Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757, 767 , 86 S.Ct. 1826, 1834 , 16 L.Ed.2d 908, 917 (1966); State v. Nickerson, 132 Idaho 406, 409-10 , 973 P.2d 758, 761-62 (Ct.App.1999). 2002Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757, 767 , 86 S.Ct. 1826, 1834 , 16 L.Ed.2d 908, 917 (1966); State v. Nickerson, 132 Idaho 406, 409-10 , 973 P.2d 758, 761-62 (Ct.App.1999). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Breedgreen2 sentences1989This purpose, as we observed in State v. Breed, 111 Idaho 497, 501 , 725 P.2d 202, 206 (Ct.App.1986), “is to provide an incentive for motorists to cooperate in determining levels of blood-alcohol content by a reasonably precise scientific method.” This purpose is better served by interpreting the statute to allow a timely, albeit delayed, assent to a blood-alcohol test than by construing it to give conclusive effect to the motorist’s initial declination. 1989This purpose, as we observed in State v. Breed, 111 Idaho 497, 501 , 725 P.2d 202, 206 (Ct.App.1986), “is to provide an incentive for motorists to cooperate in determining levels of blood-alcohol content by a reasonably precise scientific method.” This purpose is better served by interpreting the statute to allow a timely, albeit delayed, assent to a blood-alcohol test than by construing it to give conclusive effect to the motorist’s initial declination. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Hayesgreen2 sentences1986Compare State v. Hayes, 108 Idaho 556 , 700 P.2d 959 . 1986Compare State v. Hayes, 108 Idaho 556 , 700 P.2d 959 . | 1 | 1 |
| Mills v. Bridgesgreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Erwingreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Idaho. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
South Dakota v. Neville
green
2 sentences2020Moreover, in South Dakota v. Neville, 459 U.S. 553 (1983), the Supreme Court stated, “In the context of an arrest for driving while intoxicated, a police inquiry of whether the suspect will take a blood-alcohol test is not an interrogation within the meaning of Miranda.” Harmon, 131 Idaho at 84-85 , 952 P.2d at 406-07 (internal citations omitted). 2015In support of its holding, the district court relied on the statement at page 560 of the Neville opinion in which the Court stated that a one-year revocation of driving privileges for refusing to take a blood-alcohol test “is unquestionably legitimate, assuming appropriate procedural protections.” Neville, 459 U.S. at 560 , 103 S.Ct. at 920 , 74 L.Ed.2d at 756 . | 5 | 1998–2020 |
Coolidge v. New Hampshire
green
1 sentence2022“Warrantless searches and seizures are presumptively unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment.” Id. at 419 , 337 P.3d at 578 (citing Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443 , 454–55 (1971)). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Matter of Beem
green
2 sentences2021Beem, 119 Idaho at 291-92 , 805 P.2d at 497-98 . 2021Beem, 119 Idaho at 291-92 , 805 P.2d at 497-98 . | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Bullcoming v. New Mexico
green
2 sentences2015Id. at -, 131 S.Ct. at 2709-10, 180 L.Ed.2d at 615-17 . 2015Id. at -, 131 S.Ct. at 2709-10, 180 L.Ed.2d at 615-17 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
State v. Hedges
green
1 sentence2010Id. | 1 | 2010–2010 |
State v. Phillips
green
2 sentences1998Subsequently in State v. Phillips, 117 Idaho 609 , 790 P.2d 390 (Ct.App.1990), we were asked to resolve whether a blood alcohol analysis was properly admitted even though the technician who drew the blood used an isopropyl alcohol swab to cleanse the defendant’s skin prior to injecting the extraction needle, a procedure contrary to an administrative regulation disallowing use of alcohol solutions as a skin antiseptic in drawing blood samples for alcohol content analysis. 1998Subsequently in State v. Phillips, 117 Idaho 609 , 790 P.2d 390 (Ct.App.1990), we were asked to resolve whether a blood alcohol analysis was properly admitted even though the technician who drew the blood used an isopropyl alcohol swab to cleanse the defendant’s skin prior to injecting the extraction needle, a procedure contrary to an administrative regulation disallowing use of alcohol solutions as a skin antiseptic in drawing blood samples for alcohol content analysis. | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Matter of Smith
green
2 sentences1993In re Smith, 115 Idaho 808 , 770 P.2d 817 (Ct.App.1989). 1993In re Smith, 115 Idaho 808 , 770 P.2d 817 (Ct.App.1989). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
State v. Foster
green
2 sentences1989Matter of Nowoj, supra; State v. Foster, 95 Or.App. 144 , 768 P.2d 416 (1989). 1989Matter of Nowoj, supra; State v. Foster, 95 Or.App. 144 , 768 P.2d 416 (1989). | 1 | 1989–1989 |
State v. Clark
green
2 sentences1989E.g., State v. Clark, 229 Neb. 103 , 425 N.W.2d 347 (1988). 1989E.g., State v. Clark, 229 Neb. 103 , 425 N.W.2d 347 (1988). | 1 | 1989–1989 |
State v. Sutliff
green
1 sentence1986The Supreme Court interpreted this language to mean that the blood-alcohol test was statutorily deemed to relate back to the alleged offense “for purposes of applying the statutory presumption.” Id. at 525, 547 P.2d at 1130 . | 1 | 1986–1986 |
| State v. Turner green | 1 | 1984–1984 |
| State v. Cutler green | 1 | 1984–1984 |
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.