Daniel Gig Erdman, Appellant v. the State of Texas, Appellee

Summary

The Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas reversed the Court of Appeals and remanded for further proceedings, holding that the trial court abused its discretion by refusing to suppress the intoxilyzer test results because the appellant's consent was not voluntary after the officer misrepresented statutory consequences. The decision was contested by a dissent and a concurrence addressing the standard of review and the nature of consent.