Sentences with phrase «samples of your breath»

You will be asked to drink a sugar solution and then to provide samples of your breath at various intervals.

9 The accused was turned over to Constable S. a qualified breathalyzer technician and provided two samples of his breath directly into an approved instrument at 3:13 a.m. and 3:34 a.m. respectively, both of which exceeded 80 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood.

The police in Canada have the authority to demand that a person provide a sample of breath into an Approved Screening Device (Roadside tester) when a police officer:

He demonstrated to the accused how to provide a breath sample into the approved screening device, which the officer had in his cruiser, and at 2:20 a.m. the accused provided a sample of his breath which registered a fail, signifying to the officer that the accused's blood alcohol concentration was in excess of 100 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood, due to what he believed to be the calibration of the approved screening device.

First, the evidence must establish that an officer made a lawful demand on you to provide a sample of your breath.

A legal demand for breath samples was made at the roadside and the driver provided two samples of breath into two separate ASDs with FAIL results on both tests at 7:12 p.m. and 7:15 p.m..

Officer demands a sample of breath and provides driver with ample opportunity to provide a valid sample into an AS.

Background: The petitioners were motorists who had received 90 - day roadside driving prohibitions -LRB-» IRP») under provisions in the Motor Vehicle Act («MVA») establishing an automatic roadside prohibition regime («ARP») after they had either refused to supply a sample of breath, or having... [more]

Without evidence that Mr. Soules had failed the screening device, the officer would not have had grounds to require him to give samples of his breath.

He provided law enforcement with two samples of his breath for alcohol testing and came up with blood - alcohol content of 0.21, officials said.

Sometimes, and usually in cases where there is an accident, samples of breath can not easily be taken (as the client is being treated at the hospital for injuries).

In many cases the police will obtain samples of breath from a driver either at the police station with the use of a breathalyzer instrument / machine or else at the roadside with the use of an «approved screening device».

Up to the point in time when Mr. Russell indicated he would not provide the sample of his breath, it is fair to say that he had been duly diligent in pursuing his right to instruct counsel.

By informing the arresting officer that he was refusing to provide samples of his breath before the final demand was made he was, to use the words in Prosper, doing something which suggested he had changed his mind and no longer wished to speak to a lawyer.

(b) in respect of a 90 - day driving prohibition resulting from a sample of breath for analysis by means of an approved screening device and the approved screening device registering a fail,

The police may demand that a driver provide a sample of their breath into an Approved Screening Device (ASD).

«I am not satisfied that you failed or refused to comply with a demand made under the Criminal Code to provide a sample of breath for analysis by means of an ASD.

«I note that the charge indicated on the Notice was for failing to comply with a demand to provide a sample of breath for analysis by an ASD.

Unless there is a reasonable excuse, Canadians are legally obligated to provide samples of their breath when given a valid demand to provide a suitable sample.

Sometimes, for instance at a roadblock the police request a driver to provide a sample of breath into a handheld device commonly referred to as a «roadside screening device».

Other times the police ask for a driver to come with them to the station to provide samples of breath into an actually breathalyzer instrument.

The basis of this charge is that someone (who is usually a driver) was requested by a peace officer to provide a sample of their breath or sample of their blood but that that person unreasonably failed or refused to provide breath samples to the police.

In accordance with N.J.S.A. 39:4 - 50.2, a driver is «deemed to have given his consent to the taking of samples of his breath... to determine the content of alcohol in his blood» when there exists «reasonable grounds to believe that such person has been operating a motor vehicle» while under the influence of an intoxicating liquor or narcotic.

After Mr. Jackson fails, he is arrested and the officer demands he provide additional samples of his breath into the Intoxilyzer 8000C at the station.

The police must follow certain rules when arresting a person and taking samples of breath or blood.

The motorists had each been given driving prohibitions by peace officers after they had either refused to supply a sample of breath, or having supplied a sample, registered a «fail» on an «approved screening device» («ASD») as described in the Criminal Code and the MVA.

Mr. Jackson provides a roadside sample of his breath to enable its analysis by means of an approved screening device («ASD»).

The principal focus of this trial was the question of whether or not Constable Uppal made a lawful demand to Mr. John to provide a sample of his breath.

For instance in the Irish case of the Director of Public Prosecutions v Maresa Cagney [2013] 3 JIC 1101 where the Director of Public Prosecutions relied on the case of DPP v. Patricia Behan [2003] JIC 0304, in support of the proposition that failing to provide samples of her breath under section 13 of the Road Traffic Act 1994 Act was a strict liability offence with a limited defence.

If a driver is stopped by police who suspect him of being under the influence of alcohol, they will ask him to provide a «screening» sample of breath.

A breath demand was issued and client provided a sample of breath that registered as a Fail.

When Client drove out, despite showing no difficulties with either his driving or any of his behaviour, the Police demanded, and the Client gave, a sample of breath into an Approved Screening Device (also known as the «ASD», the «RSD» or the Roadside Screening Device).

Police officer demanded a sample of breath into an Approved Screening Device (also known as an «ASD») which registered a «fail».

The client was arrested and provided samples of breath indicating a blood / alcohol content of 170 mg per 100 ml of blood.

Upon police arrival he is required to give a sample of his breath into a roadside screening device (also known as an «Approved Screening Device» or an ASD).

Mr. Duncan also demonstrated to the Crown specifically where the officer's credibility would be both challenged, and likely criticized by the Court, and was able to show the Crown that the Court would likely exclude the evidence of the samples of breath, thus leading to the failure of the «over 08» charge.

In discussions with Crown counsel, Vancouver Criminal Lawyer Emmet J. Duncan persuaded the Crown that there was a substantial weakness in the Crown case, mainly due to the fact that it appeared that when the Police officer demanded the ORIGINAL sample of breath (into the ASD), he lacked a sufficient basis to do so.

Client stopped by police officer who demands Client supply a sample of breath into an Approved Screening Device (also known as an ASD, Roadside Screening Device or RSD).

Client gives samples of breath that, when analyzed, show that his blood alcohol level (or BAC or blood alcohol concentration) is 200 mg — well over TWICE the legal limit.

While there, the Client supplied two more samples of breath into the BAC Datamaster C instrument, each registering 120, which is 40 miligrams OVER the legal limit.

The Criminal Code requires that a demand for a sample of breath be made «as soon as practicable.»

Police officer subsequently demanded that Client provide samples of breath back at the detachment and Client REFUSED to do so.

Client gave samples of breath into an «Approved Screening Device» (or «ASD» or «RSD» or «Roadside Screening Device» which registered a FAIL.

Client subsequently gave samples of breath that were well in excess of the legal limit.

Not exact matches

The researchers have developed a small array of flexible sensors, which accurately detect compounds in breath samples that are specific to ovarian cancer.

«We took breath samples from 13 subjects who were undergoing methadone management, to explore whether traces of the drug could be detected via their breath, rather than using invasive techniques that disturb the integrity of the subject.

Their results showed methadone was present in all samples using both methods, but when using the method based on impaction, the concentration of methadone in exhaled breath was less than one per cent of the concentration collected by the method based on filtration.

A similar principle is used in the medical field to detect biomarkers for different kinds of health conditions, including cancer, by taking breath samples.

The breath samples were then put into a highly sensitive analytical instrument that measures the intensities of «aroma molecules» or molecules that give rise to the experience of smell.

Called «C.A.T.C.H. the Virus,» which stands for Characterizing and Tracking College Health, the study traces the trajectory of viral infections using blood samples, nasal swabs and breath samples from ailing freshmen and their closest contacts.