State v. Schlinger
| Decision Date | 05 April 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. 44161,44161 |
| Citation | 299 Minn. 212,216 N.W.2d 835 |
| Parties | STATE of Minnesota, Respondent, v. Judith C. SCHLINGER, Appellant. |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Olkon & Olkon and Ellis Olkan, Minneapolis, for appellant.
R. Scott Davies, City Atty., A. Keith Hanzel, Daniel L. Ficker, Michael T. DeCourcy, Asst. City Attys., St. Paul, for respondent.
Considered and decided by the court without oral argument.
Defendant, found guilty by a St. Paul municipal court jury of driving while under the influence of an alcoholic beverage, Minn.St. 169.121, appeals from the order denying her motion for a new trial. Defendant contends that the trial court committed prejudicial error in admitting, over objection, evidence that defendant had refused to submit to chemical testing. We believe that this case is indistinguishable on its facts from the recent case of State v. Andrews, Minn., 212 N.W.2d 863 (1973), in which we held that in a prosecution under § 169.121 the trial court committed prejudicial error in admitting such evidence. Because we cannot distinguish this case and because we are not disposed to overrule the Andrews case, we reverse the lower court's order and grant defendant a new trial.
Reversed and new trial granted.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Prideaux v. State, Dept. of Public Safety
...169.121, was violative of defendant's privilege against compelled self-incrimination. In the similar case of State v. Schlinger, 299 Minn. 212, 216 N.W.2d 835 (1974), the admission of such evidence was again held to be prejudicial error mandating Obtaining chemical evidence indicating the p......
-
Opinion of the Justices to the Senate
...by the decisions of the Supreme Court of Minnesota. See State v. Willis, 332 N.W.2d 180 (Minn.1983); State v. Schlinger, 299 Minn. 212, 216 N.W.2d 835 (1974) (per curiam); and State v. Andrews, 297 Minn. 260, 212 N.W.2d 863 (1973). Andrews determined that the admission of refusal evidence v......
-
State v. Willis, C9-82-1054.
...give rise to an inference of guilt. By refusing the test, the defendant is in effect testifying against himself. In State v. Schlinger, 299 Minn. 212, 216 N.W.2d 835 (1974), the court declined to overrule Andrews and again held the admission of evidence that a defendant refused a test to be......