<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Muni-Mail.com</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.muni-mail.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.muni-mail.com</link>
	<description>New Jersey Municipal Court Law Update Service</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 07:58:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>State Prisoner Not in Custody for Miranda Purposes &#8211; Howes v. Fields</title>
		<link>http://www.muni-mail.com/state-prisoner-not-in-custody-for-miranda-purposes-howes-v-fields/</link>
		<comments>http://www.muni-mail.com/state-prisoner-not-in-custody-for-miranda-purposes-howes-v-fields/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 07:58:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>munimail</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Muni-Mail Archive]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.muni-mail.com/?p=1432</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[02/21/12 - 9:39 pm] In this morning's United States Supreme Court opinion in Howes v. Fields, the Justices ruled that a state prisoner who was questioned at the prison by the police about crimes he committed before entering the institution was not in custody for Miranda purposes. The reasoning of the Court is spelled out... <a href="http://www.muni-mail.com/state-prisoner-not-in-custody-for-miranda-purposes-howes-v-fields/">Read More</a>
No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.muni-mail.com/state-prisoner-not-in-custody-for-miranda-purposes-howes-v-fields/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Muni-mail: Local Inspectors Needed Search Warrant</title>
		<link>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-local-inspectors-needed-search-warrant-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-local-inspectors-needed-search-warrant-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 22:06:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>munimail</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Muni-Mail Archive]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.muni-mail.com/?p=1418</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In yesterday's Appellate Division decision in State v. Heine, the Court ruled that a when a property owner refuses to permit access to a residence for inspection by local officials, the proper remedy is for the municipal inspectors to secure an administrative search warrant. The mere act of refusing access does not constitute a violation... <a href="http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-local-inspectors-needed-search-warrant-2/">Read More</a>
No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-local-inspectors-needed-search-warrant-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Muni-mail &#8211; &#8220;My Decision is final and you can&#8217;t appeal!&#8221; &#8211; O&#8217;Boyle v. DEC</title>
		<link>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-my-decision-is-final-and-you-cant-appeal-oboyle-v-dec/</link>
		<comments>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-my-decision-is-final-and-you-cant-appeal-oboyle-v-dec/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Aug 2011 00:29:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>munimail</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Muni-Mail Archive]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.muni-mail.com/?p=1394</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[08/14/11 – 5:43 pm] On Friday, the Appellate Division ruled that the decision of the secretary of a local District Ethics Committee (DEC) as to whether to docket an inquiry from a member of the public is exclusive and not subject to review or type of appellate review. In O’Boyle v. District I Ethics Committee,... <a href="http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-my-decision-is-final-and-you-cant-appeal-oboyle-v-dec/">Read More</a>
Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-only-a-public-prosecutor-may-appeal-dismissed-case-state-v-bradley/' rel='bookmark' title='Muni-mail &#8211; Only a Public Prosecutor May Appeal Dismissed Case &#8211; State v. Bradley'>Muni-mail &#8211; Only a Public Prosecutor May Appeal Dismissed Case &#8211; State v. Bradley</a> <small>&#160;[04/07/11 - 10:36 am] This morning, the Appellate Division ruled...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-scotus-local-prosecutor-civil-liability-for-brady-violations/' rel='bookmark' title='Muni-mail &#8211; SCOTUS: Local Prosecutor Civil Liability for Brady Violations'>Muni-mail &#8211; SCOTUS: Local Prosecutor Civil Liability for Brady Violations</a> <small>[03/29/11 - 12.23 pm] This morning, in a 5 to...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-important-new-rules-for-notice-in-drug-cases-state-v-heisler/' rel='bookmark' title='Muni-Mail &#8211; Important New Rules for Notice in Drug Cases &#8211; State v. Heisler'>Muni-Mail &#8211; Important New Rules for Notice in Drug Cases &#8211; State v. Heisler</a> <small>[05/18/11 - 5:10 pm] - Yesterday, in a case captioned...</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-my-decision-is-final-and-you-cant-appeal-oboyle-v-dec/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Muni-mail &#8211; New Court Rules for September 1, 2011 released</title>
		<link>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-new-court-rules-for-september-1-2011-released/</link>
		<comments>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-new-court-rules-for-september-1-2011-released/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2011 16:51:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>munimail</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Muni-Mail Archive]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.muni-mail.com/?p=1388</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#160;[07/31/11 9:52pm] The New Jersey Supreme Court has released the amendments to the Rules of Court that will become effective on September 1, 2011. For municipal courts, only four rule changes are in play. They include discovery, scheduling, sentencing and the use of acting judges. Among the major changes is a procedure where a defense... <a href="http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-new-court-rules-for-september-1-2011-released/">Read More</a>
Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-supremes-approve-trial-certification-for-municipal-court-attorneys/' rel='bookmark' title='Muni-mail &#8211; Supremes approve Trial Certification for Municipal Court Attorneys'>Muni-mail &#8211; Supremes approve Trial Certification for Municipal Court Attorneys</a> <small>&#160;[07/30/11 11:13 pm] The New Jersey Supreme Court has authorized...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-important-new-rules-for-notice-in-drug-cases-state-v-heisler/' rel='bookmark' title='Muni-Mail &#8211; Important New Rules for Notice in Drug Cases &#8211; State v. Heisler'>Muni-Mail &#8211; Important New Rules for Notice in Drug Cases &#8211; State v. Heisler</a> <small>[05/18/11 - 5:10 pm] - Yesterday, in a case captioned...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-only-a-public-prosecutor-may-appeal-dismissed-case-state-v-bradley/' rel='bookmark' title='Muni-mail &#8211; Only a Public Prosecutor May Appeal Dismissed Case &#8211; State v. Bradley'>Muni-mail &#8211; Only a Public Prosecutor May Appeal Dismissed Case &#8211; State v. Bradley</a> <small>&#160;[04/07/11 - 10:36 am] This morning, the Appellate Division ruled...</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-new-court-rules-for-september-1-2011-released/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Muni-mail &#8211; Supremes approve Trial Certification for Municipal Court Attorneys</title>
		<link>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-supremes-approve-trial-certification-for-municipal-court-attorneys/</link>
		<comments>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-supremes-approve-trial-certification-for-municipal-court-attorneys/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2011 16:47:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>munimail</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Muni-Mail Archive]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.muni-mail.com/?p=1385</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#160;[07/30/11 11:13 pm] The New Jersey Supreme Court has authorized trial certification in the area of municipal court practice. The new trial certification will become available on September 1, 2011. Attached are the Rule amendments and regulations that implement this change. The regulations begin on Appendix page 9. Download the Regulations and Amended Court Rule.Related... <a href="http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-supremes-approve-trial-certification-for-municipal-court-attorneys/">Read More</a>
Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-important-new-rules-for-notice-in-drug-cases-state-v-heisler/' rel='bookmark' title='Muni-Mail &#8211; Important New Rules for Notice in Drug Cases &#8211; State v. Heisler'>Muni-Mail &#8211; Important New Rules for Notice in Drug Cases &#8211; State v. Heisler</a> <small>[05/18/11 - 5:10 pm] - Yesterday, in a case captioned...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-youre-fired-tampering-results-in-loss-of-public-office-state-v-kennedy/' rel='bookmark' title='Muni-mail &#8211; YOU&#8217;RE FIRED! Tampering results in loss of public office &#8211; State v. Kennedy'>Muni-mail &#8211; YOU&#8217;RE FIRED! Tampering results in loss of public office &#8211; State v. Kennedy</a> <small>[05/02/11 - 10:33 pm] This morning, in a case captioned...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-scotus-local-prosecutor-civil-liability-for-brady-violations/' rel='bookmark' title='Muni-mail &#8211; SCOTUS: Local Prosecutor Civil Liability for Brady Violations'>Muni-mail &#8211; SCOTUS: Local Prosecutor Civil Liability for Brady Violations</a> <small>[03/29/11 - 12.23 pm] This morning, in a 5 to...</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-supremes-approve-trial-certification-for-municipal-court-attorneys/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Muni-mail &#8211; &#8220;Animal House&#8221; Raid by Cops Unreasonable &#8211; State v. Kaltner</title>
		<link>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-animal-house-raid-by-cops-unreasonable-state-v-kaltner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-animal-house-raid-by-cops-unreasonable-state-v-kaltner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jul 2011 05:00:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>munimail</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Muni-Mail Archive]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.muni-mail.com/?p=1369</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#160;[07-04-11 - 9:55 pm] Last week, the Appellate Division ruled that a police raid of an animal house residence during a raucus party was unreasonable. The ruling affirmed a Law Division holding that suppressed illegal drugs found by the police during a search. The Long Branch residence, inhabited by Monmouth University fraternity brothers, had been... <a href="http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-animal-house-raid-by-cops-unreasonable-state-v-kaltner/">Read More</a>
Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-scotus-announces-new-rule-for-warrantless-home-entry-kentucky-v-king/' rel='bookmark' title='Muni-mail &#8211; SCOTUS Announces New Rule for Warrantless Home Entry &#8211; Kentucky v King'>Muni-mail &#8211; SCOTUS Announces New Rule for Warrantless Home Entry &#8211; Kentucky v King</a> <small>[0/5/22/11 - 12:04 am] Last Monday, the United States Supreme...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-do-flashing-police-lights-mean-dont-leave-the-scene-state-v-adubato/' rel='bookmark' title='Muni-mail &#8211; Do Flashing Police Lights Mean Don&#8217;t Leave the Scene? &#8211; State v. Adubato'>Muni-mail &#8211; Do Flashing Police Lights Mean Don&#8217;t Leave the Scene? &#8211; State v. Adubato</a> <small>&#160;[05/23/11 - 11:59 pm] This morning, in a case captioned...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-police-dispatchers-error-leads-to-suppress-of-drugs-state-v-handy/' rel='bookmark' title='Muni-mail &#8211; Police Dispatcher&#8217;s error leads to suppress of drugs &#8211; State v. Handy'>Muni-mail &#8211; Police Dispatcher&#8217;s error leads to suppress of drugs &#8211; State v. Handy</a> <small>&#160;[ 04/26/11 - 11:28 am] In a 5-2 decision this...</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-animal-house-raid-by-cops-unreasonable-state-v-kaltner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Muni-mail &#8211; Reprimand for Judge who screamed at pro se Mom &#8211; In re Baker</title>
		<link>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-reprimand-for-judge-who-screamed-at-pro-se-mom-in-re-baker/</link>
		<comments>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-reprimand-for-judge-who-screamed-at-pro-se-mom-in-re-baker/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 11:33:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>munimail</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Muni-Mail Archive]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.muni-mail.com/?p=1357</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[06/19/11 - 12:18 am] On Friday, the New Jersey Supreme Court officially reprimanded a Superior Court Judge for engaging in a screaming tirade in open court directed at a pro se female litigant. The tirade was characterized as "repugnant and offensive" and a "vicious and unjustified attack" by the Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct (ACJC).... <a href="http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-reprimand-for-judge-who-screamed-at-pro-se-mom-in-re-baker/">Read More</a>
Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-scotus-local-prosecutor-civil-liability-for-brady-violations/' rel='bookmark' title='Muni-mail &#8211; SCOTUS: Local Prosecutor Civil Liability for Brady Violations'>Muni-mail &#8211; SCOTUS: Local Prosecutor Civil Liability for Brady Violations</a> <small>[03/29/11 - 12.23 pm] This morning, in a 5 to...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-mom-you-senile-old-bitch-not-harassment-emb-v-rfb/' rel='bookmark' title='Muni-mail &#8211; &#8220;Mom, You senile old bitch!&#8221; not harassment &#8211; EMB v. RFB'>Muni-mail &#8211; &#8220;Mom, You senile old bitch!&#8221; not harassment &#8211; EMB v. RFB</a> <small>&#160;[04/19/11 - 10:30 pm] In this morning's Appellate Division decision...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-ill-take-the-test-no-samples-refusal-state-v-schmidt/' rel='bookmark' title='Muni-mail &#8211; &#8220;I&#8217;ll take the test&#8221; + No Samples = REFUSAL &#8211; State v. Schmidt'>Muni-mail &#8211; &#8220;I&#8217;ll take the test&#8221; + No Samples = REFUSAL &#8211; State v. Schmidt</a> <small>[05/26/11 - 11:58 pm] In this morning's Supreme Court decision...</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-reprimand-for-judge-who-screamed-at-pro-se-mom-in-re-baker/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Muni-mail &#8211; Spouse Must WANT to Fund Defense in PD Case &#8211; State v. Mierzwa</title>
		<link>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-spouse-must-want-to-fund-defense-in-pd-case-state-v-mierzwa/</link>
		<comments>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-spouse-must-want-to-fund-defense-in-pd-case-state-v-mierzwa/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jun 2011 18:18:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>munimail</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Muni-Mail Archive]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.muni-mail.com/?p=1336</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[06/06/11 - 9:07 am] The Appellate Division has clarified an important component of municipal court procedure dealing with the qualification for municipal court public defender services. In State v. Mierzwa, the defendant was tried on two occasions in the municipal court and subjected each time, following conviction, to consequences of magnitude. Although he had requested... <a href="http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-spouse-must-want-to-fund-defense-in-pd-case-state-v-mierzwa/">Read More</a>
Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-only-a-public-prosecutor-may-appeal-dismissed-case-state-v-bradley/' rel='bookmark' title='Muni-mail &#8211; Only a Public Prosecutor May Appeal Dismissed Case &#8211; State v. Bradley'>Muni-mail &#8211; Only a Public Prosecutor May Appeal Dismissed Case &#8211; State v. Bradley</a> <small>&#160;[04/07/11 - 10:36 am] This morning, the Appellate Division ruled...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-youre-fired-tampering-results-in-loss-of-public-office-state-v-kennedy/' rel='bookmark' title='Muni-mail &#8211; YOU&#8217;RE FIRED! Tampering results in loss of public office &#8211; State v. Kennedy'>Muni-mail &#8211; YOU&#8217;RE FIRED! Tampering results in loss of public office &#8211; State v. Kennedy</a> <small>[05/02/11 - 10:33 pm] This morning, in a case captioned...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-important-new-rules-for-notice-in-drug-cases-state-v-heisler/' rel='bookmark' title='Muni-Mail &#8211; Important New Rules for Notice in Drug Cases &#8211; State v. Heisler'>Muni-Mail &#8211; Important New Rules for Notice in Drug Cases &#8211; State v. Heisler</a> <small>[05/18/11 - 5:10 pm] - Yesterday, in a case captioned...</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-spouse-must-want-to-fund-defense-in-pd-case-state-v-mierzwa/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Muni-mail &#8211; Drunk Driver Can Sue the Bar that Served Him &#8211; Voss v. Tranquilino</title>
		<link>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-drunk-driver-can-sue-the-bar-that-served-him-voss-v-tranquilino/</link>
		<comments>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-drunk-driver-can-sue-the-bar-that-served-him-voss-v-tranquilino/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jun 2011 19:03:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>munimail</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Muni-Mail Archive]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.muni-mail.com/?p=1332</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#160;[06/02/11 - 8:33 am] For the most part, a person who has been convicted of drunk driving or refusal to submit to a breath test is barred from asserting ANY cause of action for personal injuries, pain &#38; suffering or property damage arising out of an accident related to the drunk driving case. This result... <a href="http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-drunk-driver-can-sue-the-bar-that-served-him-voss-v-tranquilino/">Read More</a>
Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-cdl-refusal-dwi-refusal-not-the-same-state-v-nunnally/' rel='bookmark' title='Muni-mail &#8211; CDL Refusal &amp; DWI Refusal NOT the same &#8211; State v. Nunnally'>Muni-mail &#8211; CDL Refusal &#038; DWI Refusal NOT the same &#8211; State v. Nunnally</a> <small>&#160;[05/04/11 - 11:33 pm] This morning, in a case captioned...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-do-flashing-police-lights-mean-dont-leave-the-scene-state-v-adubato/' rel='bookmark' title='Muni-mail &#8211; Do Flashing Police Lights Mean Don&#8217;t Leave the Scene? &#8211; State v. Adubato'>Muni-mail &#8211; Do Flashing Police Lights Mean Don&#8217;t Leave the Scene? &#8211; State v. Adubato</a> <small>&#160;[05/23/11 - 11:59 pm] This morning, in a case captioned...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-ill-take-the-test-no-samples-refusal-state-v-schmidt/' rel='bookmark' title='Muni-mail &#8211; &#8220;I&#8217;ll take the test&#8221; + No Samples = REFUSAL &#8211; State v. Schmidt'>Muni-mail &#8211; &#8220;I&#8217;ll take the test&#8221; + No Samples = REFUSAL &#8211; State v. Schmidt</a> <small>[05/26/11 - 11:58 pm] In this morning's Supreme Court decision...</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-drunk-driver-can-sue-the-bar-that-served-him-voss-v-tranquilino/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Muni-mail &#8211; &#8220;I&#8217;ll take the test&#8221; + No Samples = REFUSAL &#8211; State v. Schmidt</title>
		<link>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-ill-take-the-test-no-samples-refusal-state-v-schmidt/</link>
		<comments>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-ill-take-the-test-no-samples-refusal-state-v-schmidt/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 May 2011 22:09:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>munimail</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Muni-Mail Archive]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.muni-mail.com/?p=1329</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[05/26/11 - 11:58 pm] In this morning's Supreme Court decision in State v. Schmidt, the Justices ruled that once a person gives his initial consent to providing a breath sample, no further action by the police is necessary to provide additional warnings to him in the event he does not provide adequate breath samples. InSchmidt,... <a href="http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-ill-take-the-test-no-samples-refusal-state-v-schmidt/">Read More</a>
Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-cdl-refusal-dwi-refusal-not-the-same-state-v-nunnally/' rel='bookmark' title='Muni-mail &#8211; CDL Refusal &amp; DWI Refusal NOT the same &#8211; State v. Nunnally'>Muni-mail &#8211; CDL Refusal &#038; DWI Refusal NOT the same &#8211; State v. Nunnally</a> <small>&#160;[05/04/11 - 11:33 pm] This morning, in a case captioned...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-surrogate-witnesses-barred-in-criminal-trials-state-v-rehmann/' rel='bookmark' title='Muni-mail &#8211; &#8220;Surrogate&#8221; Witnesses barred in criminal trials &#8211; State v. Rehmann'>Muni-mail &#8211; &#8220;Surrogate&#8221; Witnesses barred in criminal trials &#8211; State v. Rehmann</a> <small>[05/01/11 - 10:33 pm] On Friday morning, in a case...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-important-new-rules-for-notice-in-drug-cases-state-v-heisler/' rel='bookmark' title='Muni-Mail &#8211; Important New Rules for Notice in Drug Cases &#8211; State v. Heisler'>Muni-Mail &#8211; Important New Rules for Notice in Drug Cases &#8211; State v. Heisler</a> <small>[05/18/11 - 5:10 pm] - Yesterday, in a case captioned...</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.muni-mail.com/muni-mail-ill-take-the-test-no-samples-refusal-state-v-schmidt/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

