A woman was arrested for driving under the influence. An hour after she was pulled over, she took a breathalyzer test. The test result was 0.08 percent blood alcohol content. A few minutes later she took another test resulting in a 0.09 percent BAC. Twenty-five minutes later she took a blood test resulting in 0.095 percent BAC. The Department of Motor Vehicles suspended her license after conducting a hearing. The trial court denied a petition for a writ of mandate. On appeal, she contended the uncontradicted expert testimony at the hearing demonstrated her blood alcohol was rising throughout the three tests and thus below 0.08 percent at the time she was driving. The appellate court affirmed, stating its review is to determine whether the trial court’s judgment is supported by substantial evidence, and here the trial court properly looked at circumstantial evidence, such as the woman’s erratic driving and failed field sobriety tests. Coffey v. Jean Shiomoto, as Chief Deputy Director of the Department of Motor Vehicles (Cal. App. Fourth, Div. 3; August 15, 2013) 218 Cal.App.4th 1288.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.