Clayton Dean Reeder v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that motion to suppress blood sample should have been granted and reversing and remanding for a new trial
• noting the Supreme Court’s remand of Aviles casts “grave doubt” on the reasoning of Beeman
• after defendant, who had two prior DWI convictions, “refused to give his consent to have his blood drawn and tested for alcohol, law enforcement officials took a blood specimen anyway and tested it under the authority of Section 724.012(b)(3)(B)”
• after defendant, who had two prior DWI convictions, “refused to give his consent to have his blood drawn and tested for alcohol, law enforcement officials took a blood specimen anyway and tested it under the authority of ’ Section . 724.012(b)(3)(B)”
• 6th Court explicitly talks about the Supreme Court vacating Aviles

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).