杏十八新茶分享

 

State v. Eumana-Moranchel

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Supreme Court
  • Area(s) of Law: Evidence
  • Date Filed: 05-10-2012
  • Case #: S059602
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Balmer, C.J. for the Court; En Banc; De Muniz, J., Durham, J., and Walters, J. dissenting.

When there is a delay between a DUII arrest and a breath or blood test, the State may offer expert testimony explaining retrograde extrapolation to establish a defendant's blood alcohol content (BAC) was over the limit at the time defendant was driving.

The State appealed the trial court鈥檚 exclusion of expert testimony that Defendant鈥檚 BAC was over the legal limit of .08 when he was stopped for driving erratically, even though Defendant鈥檚 BAC was .064 鈥 under the legal limit 鈥 at the time of the breath test, an hour and a half later. Based on the expert's calculation, called retrograde extrapolation, the expert testified that Defendant鈥檚 BAC while driving was between .08 and .10, and therefore, above the legal limit. The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court鈥檚 exclusion, holding that the expert鈥檚 testimony was admissible because it was 鈥渄erived, using scientific principles, from a chemical analysis of defendant鈥檚 breath.鈥 Defendant appealed, and the Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the State is permitted to offer the expert鈥檚 testimony explaining retrograde extrapolation to make the 鈥渘ecessary connection鈥 that Defendant鈥檚 BAC was over the legal limit at the time he was driving. Affirmed.

Advanced Search


Back to Top