Minnesota Intoxilyzer Source Code Update: Commissioner of Public Safety Files Petition for Accelerated Review.

Yesterday the Commissioner of Public Safety filed a Petition for Accelerated Review with the Minnesota Supreme Court. Read More

Posted on May 13, 2011 by Charles Ramsay

DWI Urine Tests: Minnesota Appellate Court Signals Need for Search Warrant.

The Minnesota Court of Appeals issued an order last week which could signal a dramatic shift in the way DWI alcohol tests - especially urine tests - are conducted, while breathing new life into the Fourth Amendment. Read More

Posted on May 02, 2011 by Charles Ramsay

Breaking News: Review Granted in Consolidated Source Code Litigation

The thousands of consolidated DWI cases stemming from tests on the Intoxilyzer 5000EN, previously heard by Judge Abrams in the First Judicial District, have officially been accepted for review by the Minnesota Court of Appeals. Read More

Posted on April 29, 2011 by Daniel Koewler

Going Into Effect July 1: The Law of Unintended Consequences

Min

nesota's expansion of ignition interlock devices this summer may cause more problems than state officials anticipated. Read More

Posted on April 29, 2011 by Charles Ramsay

Minnesota Intoxilyzer Source Code Update: Responses to the Appeal.

Today, the Office of the Minnesota Attorney General on behalf of the Commissioner of Public Safety and Prosecution Liaison Counsel for the State of Minnesota filed responses to the Appeal of Judge Abrams' Order. Read More

Posted on April 29, 2011 by Charles Ramsay

DWI Urine Testing Under Review by Supreme Court.

We were probably the first attorneys in Minnesota to start bringing Frye-Mack challenges against the practice of using urine tests to prosecute drivers for DWI. Read More

Posted on April 28, 2011 by Daniel Koewler

Minnesota Intoxilyzer Source Code Victory: Why Deficient Samples Must Be Dismissed.

Judge Abrams ruled at the conclusion of the consolidated source code hearings that the Intoxilyzer cannot reliably determine deficient samples. Read More

Posted on April 21, 2011 by Charles Ramsay

Minnesota Continues to Utilize Broken Intoxilyzer

Judge Abrams noted that Minnesota officials and the BCA have been aware of the broken Intoxilyzer since at least 2006, but have refused to install corrected software. Read More

Posted on April 20, 2011 by Charles Ramsay

Intoxilyzer Source Code Victory: Judge Rules Machine Cannot Reliably Determine Deficient Samples.

Minnesota continues to use Intoxilyzer 5000 Despite Hundreds of Defective Breath Cases Annually. Read More

Posted on April 19, 2011 by Charles Ramsay

Not So Fast! Will Minnesota Supreme Court Stop the Flow of Unscientific DWI Urine Alcohol Tests?

Many believed challenges to DWI alcohol urine testing were finished last December after the Minnesota Court of Appeals issued a series of decisions. Read More

Posted on April 13, 2011 by Charles Ramsay

Minnesota Intoxilyzer Source Code Update: The Appeal

Yesterday the defense trial team filed an appeal of Judge Abrams Order regarding the statewide consolidated challenge to the Intoxilyzer 5000 based upon deficiencies in the Source Code. Read More

Posted on March 09, 2011 by Charles Ramsay

Judge Abrams Issues Final Order Regarding Source Code to Intoxilyzer 5000

Today Judge Abrams issued his ruling regarding the statewide consolidated challenge to the Intoxilyzer 5000 based upon deficiencies in the Source Code. Read More

Posted on March 09, 2011 by Daniel Koewler

EtG Urine Tests: Not as Solid as We're Supposed to Believe

We blogged previously about the new "cutting edge| type of urine test - the EtG urine test. Read More

Posted on February 23, 2011 by Daniel Koewler

"Minnesota DWI Urine Testing: A Fluid Body of Law"

Chuck Ramsay is speaking this Friday, February 18, 2011 at the Hennepin County Bar Association. Read More

Posted on February 15, 2011 by Charles Ramsay

Minnesota DWI Intoxilyzer 5000EN Source Code Arguments

The briefs are in! Today both the state and drivers submitted written closing arguments to Judge Abrams in the consolidated breath test case. Read More

Posted on January 31, 2011 by Charles Ramsay

Urine Test Concerns: EtG, the Little Enzyme That Couldn't

We've previously blogged about the serious problems that arise when the government tries to enforce its DWI laws with urine testing. Read More

Posted on January 28, 2011 by Daniel Koewler

Charged with Test Refusal? Don't Let the Man(chine) Get You Down

For years now, we've blogged about problems with the Intoxilyzer 5000 - and one problem in particular. Read More

Posted on January 25, 2011 by Daniel Koewler

Refusing to Submit to a Blood Test Not Always a Crime In Minnesota

Minne

sota is one of few states that actually make it a crime to refuse to submit to chemical testing (most simply to increase the duration of any driver's license revocation). Read More

Posted on January 03, 2011 by Daniel Koewler

The State Rests: Challenge to Intoxilyzer 5000 Enters the Calm Before the Storm.

At the end of last week, the State finished presenting its evidence in support of the continued use of the Intoxilyzer 5000 to prosecute Minnesota drivers for DWI. Read More

Posted on December 29, 2010 by Daniel Koewler

The Dangers of Dicta: Getting Pissed on for the Holidays

The Minnesota Court of Appeals issued a decision this week dealing with urine testing, an issue we've blogged about extensively. Read More

Posted on December 23, 2010 by Daniel Koewler
Showing Results 361 - 380 of 548
DWI defense that you can trust. Hundreds of satisfied clients chose Ramsay Law Firm since 1995 - contact us and find out why.