Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 169.128 (2026)

[Repealed]

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

[Repealed, 2000 c 478 art 2 s 8]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 11 cases, 1985–2002 · leading case: Vang v. Comm'r of Pub. Saf., 432 N.W.2d 203 (Minn. Ct. App. 1988).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Vang v. Comm'r of Pub. Saf., 432 N.W.2d 203 (Minn. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 36× “The inconsistency, according to respondent, is that the statute requires revocation for three offenses within five years, while the rule permits cancellation and denial for three incidents in more than five years. We reject this argument because (1) it improperly relies on Minn.”

Brooks v. Comm'r of Pub. Saf., 584 N.W.2d 15 (Minn. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 4× “See Minn. Stat. § 169.128 (1996) (providing commissioner may promulgate rules to carry out provisions of section 169.”

Dietrich v. Comm'r of Pub. Saf., 363 N.W.2d 801 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “The trial court properly found that this testimony was not sufficient to provide reasonable and probable grounds to believe that Dietrich was driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, as is required for a license revocation under Minn.Stat. § 169.128, subd. 4…”

Hintz v. Comm'r of Pub. Saf., 364 N.W.2d 486 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “The Commissioner’s interpretation is buttressed by rules promulgated by the Commissioner of Public Safety under the authority of Minn.Stat. § 169.128. Under Minnesota Rules 7412.”

Weierke v. Comm'r of Pub. Saf., 578 N.W.2d 815 (Minn. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “1 See Minn.Stat. § 169.128 (1996) (authorizing the promulgation of rules to carry out section 169.”

Thorson v. Comm'r of Pub. Saf., 519 N.W.2d 490 (Minn. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 2× “The use of this type of evidence to support the Commissioner’s determination of good cause is specifically permitted, see Minn.Stat. § 169.128; Minn.R. 7503.0100, subpt.”

Norman v. Comm'r of Pub. Saf., 404 N.W.2d 315 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 4× “Minn.Stat. § 169.128 (Supp. 1985). By statute, the legislature has clearly delegated responsibility and authority for the enforcement of the implied consent law to the Commissioner of Public Safety.”

State v. Webster, 642 N.W.2d 488 (Minn. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 169.128, subd. 2(b)(4) (1986).”

Howard v. City of St. Louis Park, 466 N.W.2d 759 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 169.128, subd. 4 (Supp.1989).”

Stavlo v. Comm'r of Pub. Saf., 379 N.W.2d 669 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 169.128 (Supp.1985). The rules provide, in relevant part, that the Commissioner shall cancel and deny the driving privileges and driver's license of a person who uses alcohol or a controlled substance after rehabilitation, and that if a person uses alcohol or a…”

State v. Lee, 577 N.W.2d 730 (Minn. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 169.128, subd. 4(a). The Scott court noted that the “civil consequences of refusal” under the implied consent statute would have no meaning if the officer could simply disregard the driver’s refusal and order the test.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.