Maryland Somerset County Accident Breath Test Driving Intoxicated Lawyers Attorneys

Victor Chandler BRICE v

Victor Chandler BRICE v. STATE of Maryland

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland

June 10, 1987

The appellant, a sixty-year-old man, he drove the truck, making service calls, all day until the accident occurred at 4:00 p.m. The appellant acknowledged having consumed four ounces of liquor before going to work that morning. Another driver, travelling behind the appellant on Route 667, observed the appellant weave to the right side of the road initially and then swerve suddenly to the left, crossing the road completely, going into a ditch and overturning his vehicle in an adjacent field.

When Maryland State Trooper arrived at the scene at 4:05 p.m., he observed the overturned truck in a field and observed the appellant walking in the roadway. Trooper smelled an "extremely strong odor of alcoholic beverage" upon the appellant's breath. The trooper also noticed that the appellant's eyes were bloodshot and his speech was slurred. Trooper gave the appellant a preliminary breath test and determined that he was a suspect for driving while intoxicated. The test results showed a blood alcohol content of 0.24 per cent. In that the blood was withdrawn approximately two hours after the accident, the blood alcohol level had inevitably been even higher at the time of the accident. Even at the lower figure of 0.24 per cent, it was almost twice the amount necessary under Md.Cts. & Jud.Proc.Code Ann. 10-307(e) (0.13 per cent) to give rise to the prima facie inference that the appellant was intoxicated. Under all of the circumstances, he received quite a break to have been found guilty only of driving while impaired under 21-902(b) of the Transportation Article. Defendant appealed his conviction in the Circuit Court for Somerset County (Maryland) for driving while impaired.

Issues:

Whether the taking of blood from the appellant in his seriously injured condition, was a violation of due process of law

Whether the results of the test should not have been admitted because the "Two Hour" Rule was violated

1) Whether the taking of blood from the appellant in his seriously injured condition, was a violation of due process of law?

The Court held that the blood was drawn by a nurse and in a hospital. Since a qualified nurse withdrew the blood under appropriately antiseptic conditions, there was obviously not the threat that might be posed by a medically untrained policeman operating in a stationhouse of "personal risk of infection and pain."

2) Whether the results of the test should not have been admitted because the "Two Hour" Rule was violated?

The Court states that the finding of Judge that the apprehension occurred at 4:16 p.m. 1) was not clearly erroneous as a matter of fact and 2) was correct as a matter of law. Our affirmance of the trial court in this regard could rest equally well on either of two alternative holdings. As time passes the alcohol in the blood disappears. Thus, a low blood alcohol content revealed by a test conducted hours after the incident would not show that the defendant had not been intoxicated or impaired at the time of the incident. An analysis reflects the amount of alcohol in the blood at the time it was withdrawn, not at the time of the incident. The clear purpose of the two-hour limitation is to "catch" the alcohol in the blood before it has had the chance to be metabolized. The invalidity of an unduly delayed test for blood alcohol, however, is one-directional. If, notwithstanding the passage of time and notwithstanding the diminution of blood alcohol content by the metabolic processes of the body, the residual blood alcohol percentage is still high enough to trigger the prima facie case of either impairment or intoxication and to give rise to either of the respective permitted inferences, the evidentiary significance cannot be denied. If the blood alcohol content is still above the statutory levels of legal significance hours after the incident, a fortiori, the suspect was inferentially impaired or intoxicated even more so at the time of the incident. The blood for the chemical test was withdrawn within two hours after the apprehension of the appellant. Even if there had been a violation of the two-hour rule, exclusion of the evidence would not be called for. Even if there had been a violation of the two-hour rule, the results of a delayed test would not have worked to the prejudice of the appellant but only to his advantage.

Conclusion:

The court affirmed the conviction, finding the case against defendant overwhelming. The test results revealed that his blood alcohol content was twice the legal limit under Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. 10-307. The "Two Hour" Rule clock began upon arrest at 4:16 p.m., not upon the officer first suspecting defendant was intoxicated. The test results were admissible and triggered the appropriate legal effect of establishing a prima facie case that defendant was intoxicated.

Disclaimer:

These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm's unofficial views of the Justices' opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content

Maryland Somerset County Accident Breath Test Driving Intoxicated Lawyers Attorneys

By: Atchuthan Sriskandarajah

POST COMMENT

Maryland Carroll County Traffic Light Sobriety Test Miranda Rights Driving Intoxicated Lawyers Attorneys Retirement Pension Plan Maryland Montgomery County Driving Influence Alcohol Consumption Subsequent Offender Lawyers Attorneys Find the Best DWI Lawyers in Dallas TX - DUI Lawyers Maryland Montgomery County DUI Driving Influence Probation Judgment Lawyers Attorneys The Dos And Dont While Investing Causes Precisely Why A Person Need To Start Off Saving For Retirement Maryland Anne Arundel County DUI Consecutive Sentence Double Jeopardy Rule Lawyers Attorneys Retirement Communities Investing In Stock Options Can Be An Exciting Property Investing 7 Reasons Why Now Is A Good Time To Invest Divorce Lawyers Va Beach VA:Property Settlement Agreement Divorce Lawyers Harrisonburg Va:Property Division