This case really doesn't matter, unless you are Michael Martinez
State v. Martinez, 2006 UT App 76
Martinez argued that Utah Code Ann. ยงยง 41-6-166 (1998) limits police discretion to arrest for a misdemeanor traffic offense to only certain situations specifed in that section. The court of appeals disagreed. Section 166 merely dictates post-arrest procedures.
But the legislature repealed section 166 last year when it renumbered the traffic code. So this published decision is of no value, unless you are Michael Martinez, in which case it means your conviction for meth possession will stand.
Martinez argued that Utah Code Ann. ยงยง 41-6-166 (1998) limits police discretion to arrest for a misdemeanor traffic offense to only certain situations specifed in that section. The court of appeals disagreed. Section 166 merely dictates post-arrest procedures.
But the legislature repealed section 166 last year when it renumbered the traffic code. So this published decision is of no value, unless you are Michael Martinez, in which case it means your conviction for meth possession will stand.
posted by Matt, Rach, Samus, Little-O, & Hank the Tank at 9:23 PM
1 Comments:
It's ALWAYS meth anymore. It's scary how that drug can make 30 year-old clients look 70. It's more than just their missing teeth. Their skin is all dried out and wrinkled too.
Post a Comment
<< Home