<?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>Minnesota DWI DUI Lawyer, Minneapolis Criminal Defense Attorney &#187; DWI</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/tag/dwi/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.kanslaw.com/blog</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Jun 2010 02:13:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Minnesota Court Rules Warrant Not Required to Analyze DWI Blood Test</title>
		<link>http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/minnesota-court-rules-warrant-not-required-to-analyze-dwi-blood-test.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/minnesota-court-rules-warrant-not-required-to-analyze-dwi-blood-test.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jun 2010 02:11:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Douglas Kans</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[blood test]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DWI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Minnesota]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unreasonable searches and seizures]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/?p=354</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[  In a recent published Minnesota Appellate Court Decision, Harrison v. Commissioner of Public Safety, the Court ruled that the government is not required to gather a search warrant prior to testing a driver&#8217;s blood sample, which he consented to at an earlier date subsequent to his DWI arrest. In Harrison, the driver consented to a withdraw [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/minnesota-court-rules-warrant-not-required-to-analyze-dwi-blood-test.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Minnesota Court Issues Ruling in DWI Urine Test Case</title>
		<link>http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/minnesota-court-issues-ruling-in-dwi-urine-test-case.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/minnesota-court-issues-ruling-in-dwi-urine-test-case.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2010 05:28:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Douglas Kans</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DWI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fourth amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[implied consent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Minnesota]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reliabilty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unreasonable searches and seizures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[urine pooling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[urine test]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/?p=297</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[  Within the last several months there has been a string of rulings by the Minnesota Court of Appeals with regard to urine test challenges.  I have discussed these rulings in my earlier blog postings.   http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/minnesota-court-issues-ruling-on-reliabililty-of-urine-testing-in-dwi-cases.html and http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/minneapolis-dwi-lawyer-mn-court-issues-ruling-on-urine-testing.html.  These cases, for the most part, dealt with the issue of  &#8221;urine pooling&#8221; and whether and expert witness should be allowed [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/minnesota-court-issues-ruling-in-dwi-urine-test-case.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>MN Click-it-or-Ticket Law Has Hidden Implications for Individuals Charged with DUI in Minnesota</title>
		<link>http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/mn-click-it-or-ticket-law-has-hidden-implications-for-individuals-charged-with-dui-in-minnesota.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/mn-click-it-or-ticket-law-has-hidden-implications-for-individuals-charged-with-dui-in-minnesota.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Jul 2009 02:19:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Douglas Kans</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DWI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Minnesota DUI law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reasonable suspicion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[seatbelt law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[texting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[traffic stop]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[under the influence of alcohol]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/?p=90</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Minnesota&#8217;s recent seat belt law and last year’s text messaging ban expanded law enforcement officers’ authority to pull drivers over, because both laws are “primary enforcement,” laws, or laws that allow officers to pull drivers over for violating them, without requiring that there be another reason for the officer to stop the driver. The new “Click [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/mn-click-it-or-ticket-law-has-hidden-implications-for-individuals-charged-with-dui-in-minnesota.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Minnesota&#8217;s DWI/BWI Breath Tests</title>
		<link>http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/minnesotas-dwibwi-breath-tests.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/minnesotas-dwibwi-breath-tests.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 20:27:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Douglas Kans</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[blood test]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Boating under the influence of alcohol]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BWI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[driving under the influence of alcohol]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DWI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Minnesota breath test]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Minnesota DUI Lawyer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PBT test]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[urine test]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/?p=119</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Anyone who has either experienced DUI or BWI charges, or who has had a friend or colleague experience DUI or BWI charges, probably wondered why were there two types of breath tests?   The first breath test an individual facing DUI or BWI charges experiences is called the PBT &#8212; or preliminary breath test.  Sometimes [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/minnesotas-dwibwi-breath-tests.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What is Boating While Intoxicated (BWI) and is it different from DUI?</title>
		<link>http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/bwiand-dui.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/bwiand-dui.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2009 22:10:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Douglas Kans</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[boating under the influence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BWI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DWI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reasonable suspicion]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/?p=112</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As the Minnesota state motto accurately states, we are a land of 10,000 lakes.  As the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources website states, &#8220;With nearly 900,000 registered boats, Minnesota is number one in boats per capita in the US. In fact, there is about one boat for every six people in the state.&#8221;  And, with that [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/bwiand-dui.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>State of Minnesota petitions MN Supreme Court to reconsider Intoxilyzer source code ruling</title>
		<link>http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/state-of-minnesota-petitions-mn-supreme-court-to-reconsider-intoxilyzer-source-code-ruling.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/state-of-minnesota-petitions-mn-supreme-court-to-reconsider-intoxilyzer-source-code-ruling.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 May 2009 22:13:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DWI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intoxilyzer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[source code]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/?p=81</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a petition signed May 5th, 2009,  the State of Minnesota has requested the Minnesota Supreme Court to reconsider its ruling in State vs. Underdahl.  Specifically, the state has requested that the Court reverse its earlier finding that the State of Minnesota has possession of the source code. In its petition, the state argues that they are [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.kanslaw.com/blog/state-of-minnesota-petitions-mn-supreme-court-to-reconsider-intoxilyzer-source-code-ruling.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
