In many instances in which the police suspect a motorist is operating a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, they will administer a breath test. Breath tests are only admissible if they are conducted in a certain manner, however. For example, they may be deemed invalid if there was a foreign substance in the suspect’s mouth at the time of the test, as discussed in a recent Washington DUI case in which a defendant who was charged with vehicular homicide challenged the validity of his breath test. If you are accused of harming someone while driving under the influence, it is in your best interest to speak to a Tacoma DUI defense attorney regarding what defenses you may be able to assert.
History of the Case
It is reported that the defendant was charged with vehicular homicide following a dirt bike collision. At the scene, the arresting officer observed that the defendant had chewing tobacco in his mouth, which the defendant removed before being transported to jail. Upon arriving at the jail, the officer prepared to administer a breath alcohol test and asked the defendant if he had any foreign substances in his mouth. The defendant denied having any, and the officer performed a check, noticing only tiny strands of tobacco between the defendant’s teeth, which he described as “debris” and did not consider to be a foreign substance.
Reportedly, the officer proceeded with the breath test without requiring the removal of these strands. The defendant subsequently filed a pretrial motion to suppress the breath test results, arguing that the State could not meet the foundational requirements for its admissibility under RCW 46.61.506(4)(a). The trial court denied the motion, concluding that the State had provided prima facie evidence that the defendant did not have any foreign substances in his mouth based on his denial. The defendant then challenged the trial court’s decision.
Admissibility of Breath Tests in DUI Cases
Upon review, the court evaluated whether the strands of tobacco observed in the defendant’s teeth constituted a “foreign substance” that should have been removed before administering the breath test, thereby impacting its admissibility.
The court reviewed the statutory requirements under RCW 46.61.506(4)(a), which mandates that the State must produce prima facie evidence that the individual being tested had no foreign substances in their mouth at the beginning of the observation period. The court noted that the regulations allow this determination to be made either by checking the mouth or relying on the individual’s denial of having any foreign substances.
The court ultimately affirmed the trial court’s ruling based on the reasoning that the officer’s reliance on the defendant’s denial was sufficient to meet the State’s burden of proof because the officer did not otherwise believe that the tobacco strands constituted a foreign substance.
The court also distinguished between a substantial amount of tobacco, which could affect the breath test’s validity, and tiny strands, which were unlikely to do so.
Thus, the court upheld the trial court’s conclusion that the breath test results were admissible while also noting that the defendant could challenge the validity of the test results at trial based on the presence of the tobacco strands.
Talk to a Skilled Tacoma Defense Attorney
Certain DUI offenses, like vehicular homicide, carry significant penalties, and it is crucial for anyone faced with such charges to understand their options. If you are charged with a DUI offense, the skilled Tacoma DUI defense attorneys at The Law Offices of Smith & White can inform you of your rights and aid you in seeking the best outcome possible under the facts of your case. You can reach us through our form online or by calling us at 253-203-1645 to arrange a consultation.