People v. Engelbrecht

How courts have described this case

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

• defendant, a nonfirst offender, was incorrectly warned that suspension period for refusing test was one year; defendant refused test and received two-year suspension
• defendant, a nonfirst offender, was incorrectly warned that suspension period for refusing test was one year; defendant refused test and received two-year suspension
• “The purpose of requiring that the motorist be warned of the consequences of his refusal is to enable him to make an informed choice”
• “The purpose of requiring that the motorist be warned of the consequences of his refusal is to enable him to make an informed choice”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).