Willits v. Commissioner of Public Safety, Minn.Ct.App., 3/6/2017. Not a criminal case but too amusing to pass up. A state trooper stopped and then arrested Mr. Willits for driving while impaired. At the station he first spoke with an attorney and then agreed to take a breath test. Mr. Willits also decided that he wanted to take an independent test, so he made some calls to arrange it, including one to his spouse with directions to bring a Tupperware container to the jail. His spouse showed up at the jail where jail staff escorted her back to the booking area; she had th Tupperware container for the purpose.
But, the jailor also provided Mr. Willits with a "medical-grade sterile specimen cup for Willits to use to collect his urine." Mr. Willits filled the specimen cup even though his "container of choice" was Tupperware; must be the lids.
Mr. Willits lost his implied consent hearing where he claimed that the jailors had impeded, if not denied him his right to an additional test. He relied upon an unpublished court of appeals opinion which had reached just that result because the jailor actually did deny some fellow - the court of appeals does not even identify the name of this unpublished opinion - a container of his choice. The trial court had found that Mr. Willits had access to both containers when he peed into the specimen cup, and Mr. Willits could offer no evidence that there was anything wrong with the specimen cup.
No comments:
Post a Comment