Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Woman With Asthma Wins Court Ruling Over Breath Test

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-01-06 06:57 PM
Original message
Woman With Asthma Wins Court Ruling Over Breath Test
Woman With Asthma Wins Court Ruling Over Breath Test

POSTED: 1:58 pm EST December 31, 2005

INDIANAPOLIS -- Not being able to blow hard enough for a breath test for alcohol is not the same as refusing to take the test, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled.

The 3-1 ruling Friday reversed a Hancock Superior Court decision.

The case involved a woman who was charged with refusing a breath test under Indiana's implied consent law following an accident in which she was suspected of drunken driving.

According to court documents, a Hancock County sheriff's deputy administered field sobriety tests, including a portable breath test, to Meredith Upchurch after a December 2004 traffic accident. The deputy then asked her to go to the jail to take another breath test, and she complied.

http://www.theindychannel.com/news/5756970/detail.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bbinacan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-01-06 06:59 PM
Response to Original message
1. I'm glad she won. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Horse with no Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-01-06 06:59 PM
Response to Original message
2. Wow.
Many folks with asthma would not be able to blow hard enough. Were they planning on taking all of these to jail as well?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MercutioATC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-01-06 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. You don't really have to blow all that hard...
Unless she also has emphysema, my bet is that she intentionally blew softly, intending to fall back on the "athsma defense". You don't have to have the lungs of a track star to make an intoxilyzer register.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Horse with no Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-01-06 07:09 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. My guess is that you don't have asthma?
I do and as we speak--I couldn't blow hard enough to make it register.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MercutioATC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-01-06 07:27 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. No, but I had respiratory problems as a child...and my son has athsma.
During an athsma attack, no, she probably couldn't have blown hard enough. Most of the time, however, it should have been no problem...it doesn't take THAT much air to make those things register.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-01-06 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. The stress level induced by the whole ordeal may have made it harder
for her (ie, with her breathing).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MercutioATC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-01-06 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. That's true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bbinacan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-01-06 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. I got a DWI back in 1986 and
I remember I had to blow pretty damned hard to get a reading.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MercutioATC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-01-06 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. In 1986? Possibly. Some departments were still using the old machines.
These days, though, I don't think many of those machines are still around. My point is that unless you have severe respiratory problems or are in the middle of an athsma attack, you should be able to get the machine to register.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bbinacan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-01-06 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Thanks. I was wondering
if newer machines required less effort.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AwakeAtLast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-01-06 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #11
21. Ha, ha! You don't live in Indiana, do you!
It would not surprise me at all to learn that the equipment is old. However, I do get your point.

:hi: from Indiana!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MercutioATC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-01-06 07:02 PM
Response to Original message
3. Silly Deputy...
I don't know about Indiana, but in Ohio law enforcement has the right to ask for a sample of either your breath, blood or urine for testing purposes. Everybody uses the breath option because it's quicker and cheaper but if the Deputy thought this woman was really over the limit, a blood sample could have been requested.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-01-06 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #3
20. Some states (Arkansas for one) only let you choose another test
after you have complied with the test the officer asks you to take, which is usually the breath test since it is quick and accurate, and cheap.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabbat hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-01-06 07:04 PM
Response to Original message
4. the bigger story should be
if she was DWI or not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bbinacan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-01-06 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. My guess is no
to DWI. If the cop thought so, he'd allowed a blood test. Just trying to make his bust.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
longship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-01-06 07:27 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. Innocent until proved guilty.
I'm not condoning driving while intoxicated, but if the police make a mistake, the perp walks. Those are the rules in an allegedly democratic nation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bbinacan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-01-06 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. Exactly! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pitohui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-01-06 08:09 PM
Response to Original message
14. similar happened to a friend, he asked them to take a blood test
instead they backed off and let him go because they didn't feel like dragging him to the station where the equipment lived

why not give the blood test if the accused is willing in a situation like this, it would clear up the matter quickly?

i can't take a deep breath or blow v. hard either, i have always assumed a blood test would be available at the police station if i were falsely accused
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-01-06 09:11 PM
Response to Original message
17. I'm Pretty Sure I Don't Believe Her
If her story is true than I am glad she won. I am conflicted though in the sense that I have probably 80% doubt that asthma or not she couldn't get the minimum breath necessary to blow into a machine that really doesn't require much effort at all.

Regardless of my trust in her story, I agree with the ruling because whether in reality or not she was guilty, the fact she technically had a breathing disorder is enough to create reasonable doubt, as I even have, though it is only 20% :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DELUSIONAL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-01-06 09:42 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. I have no idea what the hell you said
and frankly don't care.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-01-06 09:53 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. Your Name Suits You Well I See LOL
It is written pretty simplistically. Not sure what would be difficult for you to understand.

And I get a kick out of your self irony: Declaring you don't care yet caring enough to respond :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 03:44 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC