Jackson v. Dir. Revenue

Missouri Court of Appeals

Jackson v. Dir. Revenue

544 S.W.3d 324

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 10, 2018

DocketWD 80785

StatusPublished

This text of 544 S.W.3d 324 (Jackson v. Dir. 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

Jackson v. Dir. Revenue, 544 S.W.3d 324 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

Per curiam:

Jimmy Jackson, Jr. ("Jackson") appeals from a judgment sustaining the Director of Revenue's suspension of his driving privileges. Jackson argues that the trial court erred in admitting the results of the breath alcohol test into evidence. Jackson claims the foundational requirements for *325admission of the test were not met because the test was not performed in accordance with regulations promulgated by the Department of Health and Senior Services ("DHSS"). Specifically, Jackson asserts that the police officer who administered the breath alcohol test did not continuously observe Jackson for the fifteen minutes immediately prior to the administration of the test. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

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

Per curiam:

Jimmy Jackson, Jr. ("Jackson") appeals from a judgment sustaining the Director of Revenue's suspension of his driving privileges. Jackson argues that the trial court erred in admitting the results of the breath alcohol test into evidence. Jackson claims the foundational requirements for *325admission of the test were not met because the test was not performed in accordance with regulations promulgated by the Department of Health and Senior Services ("DHSS"). Specifically, Jackson asserts that the police officer who administered the breath alcohol test did not continuously observe Jackson for the fifteen minutes immediately prior to the administration of the test. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

544 S.W.3d 324, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jackson-v-dir-revenue-moctapp-2018.