Court Opinion

ID: 9800378
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 08:13:45.973412+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:43:14.571743
License: Public Domain

CHUTICH, Judge
(concurring specially).
I agree with the majority’s conclusion that sufficient evidence supports the district court’s finding that Stevens refused to submit to chemical testing and that her unconstitutional-conditions argument fails. I write separately concerning the unconstitutional-conditions discussion because I would base my rejection of that doctrine solely on the rationale stated in Part D of *732the majority’s opinion. I agree with the majority that the Minnesota Supreme Court’s decision in State v. Brooks, 838 N.W.2d 563 (Minn.2013), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 134 S.Ct. 1799, 188 L.Ed.2d 759 (2014), prevents Stevens from establishing that the implied-consent statute coerced her into surrendering her Fourth Amendment right in a way that offends the unconstitutional-conditions doctrine.