Client was informed of right to a second breath test and opted to provide
second breath sample.
The driver is then asked if he would like to provide
a second breath sample, which he declined.
A failure to provide
a second breath sample does not constitute a refusal at the roadside.
The second breath sample was voluntary.
Client provided
second breath sample, with some difficulty, using a different device.
This is why the right to
a second breath sample, on a different breathalyzer, is protected by the law.
If the intention is to allow a driver being checked for sobriety to provide an accurate reading of their breath alcohol content, it does not make sense why police would be allowed to leave out important information about
the second breath sample.
Confusingly, the law says police must advise the driver of their right to be provided with
a second breath sample.
Not exact matches
Unlike older methods, which required
samples to be prepared and then injected into the machine, the device used in this study can directly accept
breath and show the results in
seconds.
An expert report from Nizar Shajani, forensic toxicologist was submitted showing that ST's likely BAC would have been within the legal limit but and that FALSE FAIL results could have been achieved by the two separate ASD units used owing to «mouth alcohol» from the wine which was last consumed about 11 minutes from the
second FAIL
breath sample.
If a driver was unaware that a different breathalyzer must be used for the
second breath test and a
breath sample was given anyways, it can be challenging to dispute the officer's version of events after the fact.