In re the Welfare of M.S.E.

389 N.W.2d 523, 1986 Minn. App. LEXIS 4451
Court of Appeals of Minnesota·Decided June 17, 1986·No. No. C1-86-84·Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The facts of this case are adequately stated in Edwards v. Commissioner of Public Safety, 381 N.W.2d 27 (Minn.Ct.App.1986).

In Edwards, this court held that the arresting officer had probable cause to believe appellant was driving under the influence. Id. at 30. We affirm that decision.

We also held in Edwards that there was sufficient evidence to support the finding that appellant was driving under the influence. Id. We also affirm that decision.

Finally, appellant contends that his constitutional right against self-incrimination was violated when the officer asked him if he was driving without giving a Miranda warning. Such a contention is meritless. See State v. Herem, 384 N.W.2d 880 (Minn.1986); State v. Kline, 351 N.W.2d 388 (Minn.Ct.App.1984).

DECISION

The trial court is affirmed.

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

In re the Welfare of M.S.E., 389 N.W.2d 523, 1986 Minn. App. LEXIS 4451 (Mich. Ct. App. 1986).

389 N.W.2d 523 (In re the Welfare of M.S.E.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Kline
351 N.W.2d 388 (Court of Appeals of Minnesota, 1984)
State v. Herem
384 N.W.2d 880 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1986)
Edwards v. Commissioner of Public Safety
381 N.W.2d 27 (Court of Appeals of Minnesota, 1986)