Court Opinion

ID: 9685564
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 14:47:55.968603+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:07.709941
License: Public Domain

BIEGELMEIER, Judge
(concurring).
I concur with a few observations.
This court held in the cited Stensland opinion in 1962 the officer chooses the test; that any added tests recognized are to be at the choice and expense of the motorist is so clear that the whole appeal is frivolous.
It may well be appeals of this type are the result of court opinions binding on us that require appeals to be taken to appellate courts, as this was, at public expense for defendants who make claims they are indigent, but who nevertheless continue to drive automobiles as a menace to others and thus contribute to the increasing accident and death roles. They have everything to win, nothing to lose; the public has little to win, everything to lose including its confidence in the ability of courts to enforce domestic' tranquility.