Supreme Court· 6/11/1984

California v. Trombetta

Citations

467 U.S. 479
104 S. Ct. 2528
81 L. Ed. 2d 413
1984 U.S. LEXIS 103
52 U.S.L.W. 4744

About this case

California v. Trombetta — U.S. Supreme Court case. This entry links to the full opinion in the CourtListener corpus.

Read the full opinion on CourtListener.

Editorial context from Wikipedia (CC-BY-SA 4.0).

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding that this principle was not violated when breath-test evidence was not preserved by the Slate
holding that Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not require that law enforcement agencies preserve breath samples in order to introduce breath-analysis tests at trial
recognizing that the Intoxilyzer has passed the accuracy requirements established by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration of the Department of Transportation
holding that there is no due process violation where any potential exculpatory evidence can be established by other means
holding that this principle was not violated when breath-test evidence was not preserved by the State
holding that this principle was not violated when breath-test evidence was not preserved by the State

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Marshall, O'Connor

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

2,002 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

22 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named California v. Trombetta

4 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.