Carden v. Director of Revenue

Missouri Court of Appeals

Carden v. Director of Revenue

492 S.W.3d 669, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 646, 2016 WL 3538561

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 28, 2016

DocketWD 78189

StatusPublished

This text of 492 S.W.3d 669 (Carden v. Director of Revenue) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Carden v. Director of Revenue, 492 S.W.3d 669, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 646, 2016 WL 3538561 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

John Carden appeals the judgment of the trial court sustaining the administrative suspension of his driving privileges under section 302.536. He contends that his blood alcohol test result was improperly admitted into evidence without the necessary foundation as promulgated by 19 CSR 25-30.070; therefore, the trial court’s judgment was not supported by the evidence. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties.

The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

John Carden appeals the judgment of the trial court sustaining the administrative suspension of his driving privileges under section 302.536. He contends that his blood alcohol test result was improperly admitted into evidence without the necessary foundation as promulgated by 19 CSR 25-30.070; therefore, the trial court’s judgment was not supported by the evidence. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties.

The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

492 S.W.3d 669, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 646, 2016 WL 3538561, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carden-v-director-of-revenue-moctapp-2016.