My blood test results

[jeepson33s]

What is the name of your state? Georgia

Well my blood test came back @ .06% BAC. I took the test 1:10 Hr/min after i blew in the intoxalizer 5000 (test at the station) My breath test said that i had a .103 BAC. What should i do about this and is there any formula to see what my blood BAC would have been at the time of the of the intox 5000 test?

 

[seniorjudge]

There are several thousand charts on the internet.

Google a couple hundred of them and tell us what you come up with.

 

[hoss1]

.06

OK bro here is how it works... ATleast in my state


the hand held devise you blew in is used just for probable casuse.... usually not used in court because they are not tpyically accurate...

the .06 is below the legal limit... now they can still try to get you for DUI... but it will be VERY difficult to do so... unless drungs are invloved....

at anyrate My guess would be they will drop the charges.. but I would still get some legal advice..

FYI at least in PA THREE MAJOR MISTAKES people make
are.
1. Anwsering any questions cops ask-- you do not have to anwser anything other than name and addy..

2. taking the FST--- they are not required in any state REFUSE THEM all you are doing is giving evidance..

3. Blowing in a portable Breath machine...--- atleast in PA you do not have to again just looking for probable cuase refuse it.

 

[moburkes]

OK bro here is how it works... ATleast in my state


the hand held devise you blew in is used just for probable casuse.... usually not used in court because they are not tpyically accurate...

the .06 is below the legal limit... now they can still try to get you for DUI... but it will be VERY difficult to do so... unless drungs are invloved....

at anyrate My guess would be they will drop the charges.. but I would still get some legal advice..

FYI at least in PA THREE MAJOR MISTAKES people make
are.
1. Anwsering any questions cops ask-- you do not have to anwser anything other than name and addy..

2. taking the FST--- they are not required in any state REFUSE THEM all you are doing is giving evidance..

3. Blowing in a portable Breath machine...--- atleast in PA you do not have to again just looking for probable cuase refuse it.

The ONLY accurate information in the above quoted post is this: "I would still get some legal advice".

 

[hoss1]

The ONLY accurate information in the above quoted post is this: "I would still get some legal advice".

it's all 100% accurate in PA... as I stated....

stop trying to scare the kid.... he got problems.... and the FACT is he is UNDER the legal limit... HARD TO GET A CONVICTION with out evidance... BAC is the most accurate evadance they cops requested it.. AND IT CAME BACK BELOW THE LEGAL LIMIT...

stop trying to scare the kid. this guy has hope to get out of his situation..

you still need legal councel

explain what is not accurate in my statements...

 

[Curt581]

it's all 100% accurate in PA... as I stated....

How does PA law work in the state of Georgia?

stop trying to scare the kid.... he got problems.... and the FACT is he is UNDER the legal limit... HARD TO GET A CONVICTION with out evidance... BAC is the most accurate evadance they cops requested it.. AND IT CAME BACK BELOW THE LEGAL LIMIT

stop trying to scare the kid. this guy has hope to get out of his situation..

you still need legal councel

explain what is not accurate in my statements...

How about every other word you typed is spelled wrong? You actually spelled EVIDENCE wrong three different ways. That doesn't exactly inspire confidence that you know what you're talking about.

There is evidence. The officer's observations as to his physical condition, ie: bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, inability to walk without assistance, strong odor of alcohol on his breath, pants zipper open, etc. The officer can testify about all those things. That's evidence.

Just because one BAC shows under the legal limit, does NOT mean he can't be convicted. The Intoxilyzer 5000 is an evidentiary test, and just as admissible as the blood results.

 

[Ohiogal]

it's all 100% accurate in PA... as I stated....

Nope. it is all wrong actually -- at least according to PA statutes. But thanks for making it up.

stop trying to scare the kid.... he got problems.... and the FACT is he is UNDER the legal limit... HARD TO GET A CONVICTION with out evidance... BAC is the most accurate evadance they cops requested it.. AND IT CAME BACK BELOW THE LEGAL LIMIT...

As has been stated, NOPE. Not hard to get a conviction because there will be other evidence.

stop trying to scare the kid. this guy has hope to get out of his situation..

Dude you can't even spell most of the words in your posts.

you still need legal councel

SPELLCHECK PLEASE!

explain what is not accurate in my statements...[/QUOTE]
Where to begin?
0.06% is under the legal limit where you are automatically considered intoxicated HOWEVER that does not mean you cannot be convicted. According to the law in PA even:

person shall not drive, operate or be in actual physical control of the movement of any vehicle:

While under the influence of alcohol to a degree which renders the person incapable of safe driving;
While under the influence of any controlled substance . . . to a degree which renders the person of incapable of safe driving;
While under the combined influence of alcohol and any controlled substance to a degree which renders the person incapable of safe driving; or While the amount of alcohol by weight in the blood of the person who is an adult is 0.08% or greater or a minor is 0.02% or greater.
It is considered prima facie evidence if an adult has 0.08%, a minor has 0.02% or anyone operating a commercial vehicle has 0.04% or more by weight of alcohol in his or her blood at the time of driving, operating or being in actual physical control of the movement of said vehicle. For the purpose of this section, the chemical test of the sample of the person_s breath, blood or urine shall be from a sample obtained within two hours after the person drove, operated or was in actual physical control of the vehicle.

PLEASE NOTE THE "OR" that I highlighted.


As for the rest of it, by stating the following

Blowing in a portable Breath machine...--- atleast in PA you do not have to again just looking for probable cuase refuse it.

You just told someone to violate the law which is this:

CHEMICAL TESTING TO DETERMINE AMOUNT OF ALCOHOL OR CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE
Section 1547 of the Vehicle Code
Any person who drives, operates or is in actual physical control of the movement of a motor vehicle in Pennsylvania shall be deemed to have given consent to one or more chemical tests of breath, blood or urine for the purposes of determining the alcoholic content of blood or the presence of a controlled substance if a police officer has reasonable grounds to believe that person to have been driving, operating or in actual physical control of the movement of the motor vehicle:

While under the influence of alcohol or a controlled substance or both; or

which was involved in an accident in which the operator or passenger of any vehicle involved or a pedestrian required treatment at a medical facility or was killed.
If a person refuses to submit to a chemical test, the testing shall not be conducted but upon notice by the police officer, the Department of Transportation shall suspend the operating privilege of the person for a period of 12 months.

Meaning the person in PA who listens to you automatically got their license suspended for 12 months. MORON.

Now considering the OP is from Georgia, how was anything you posted relevant? Let alone correct for PA?

 

[moburkes]

it's all 100% accurate in PA... as I stated....

stop trying to scare the kid.... he got problems.... and the FACT is he is UNDER the legal limit... HARD TO GET A CONVICTION with out evidance... BAC is the most accurate evadance they cops requested it.. AND IT CAME BACK BELOW THE LEGAL LIMIT...

stop trying to scare the kid. this guy has hope to get out of his situation..

you still need legal councel

explain what is not accurate in my statements...

I suppose that you no longer need me to SPELL it out for ya. If you're still unclear, please let me know. I'd be HAPPY to show you the error of your words.

 

[hoss1]

How does PA law work in the state of Georgia?



How about every other word you typed is spelled wrong? You actually spelled EVIDENCE wrong three different ways. That doesn't exactly inspire confidence that you know what you're talking about.

There is evidence. The officer's observations as to his physical condition, ie: bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, inability to walk without assistance, strong odor of alcohol on his breath, pants zipper open, etc. The officer can testify about all those things. That's evidence.

Just because one BAC shows under the legal limit, does NOT mean he can't be convicted. The Intoxilyzer 5000 is an evidentiary test, and just as admissible as the blood results.

when this is a spelling bee let me know... stop tying to Filibuster by diverting attention away from the points...

Officers obervations are SUBJECTIVE---

Boodshot eyes you said--- maybe I have allergies...
Slurred Speech--- how does the officer know how I actaully talk? maybe that is my normal speech pattern
Strong odor of Acohol--- EVER see a office write slight odor? Nope does not translate well on a police report... how does he know someone did not spill beer on me.. BTW not all booze smells.
zipper on panst open--- now thats funny... big deal I took a leak was in a hurry forgot to sip up it happends to sober people all the time...

it's all subjective and with out an accident injuries the DA got issues...

I never said he still could not be convited READ WHAT I WROTE NOT WHAT YOU WANT TO SEE TO START AND ARGUEMENT.. said its much harder... for the DA.. and odds are the charges will be dropped with the only HARD evidance they have says he was below the legal limit...

dude I just schooled you with FACTS...

 

[moburkes]

Yes, they are are subjective - the only problem with your argument is that they are TRAINED on what to look for. They aren't randomly making this stuff up.

 

[hoss1]

Yes, they are are subjective - the only problem with your argument is that they are TRAINED on what to look for. They aren't randomly making this stuff up.

are they trained that well.. does a two day class make them experts? don't think so....

an officer is TRAINED to look for blood shot eyes as a sign of bring drunk right? well lets see My doctor say I have allergies HE WENT TO MED SCHOOL FOR 12 YEARS and gave me a clincal opinion of this...

now I got a cop saying my eyes are blood shot cause I am drunk? what told him this is 2-3 day class? so know he is smarted and know more than the doc who gave them that diagnosis..

if i was under the legal limit like this guy and the DA wanted to take this to court.. I would be VERY confident I would win... and would lose zero sleep over it.

 

[hoss1]

Nope. it is all wrong actually -- at least according to PA statutes. But thanks for making it up.



As has been stated, NOPE. Not hard to get a conviction because there will be other evidence.



Dude you can't even spell most of the words in your posts.


SPELLCHECK PLEASE!

explain what is not accurate in my statements...

Where to begin?
0.06% is under the legal limit where you are automatically considered intoxicated HOWEVER that does not mean you cannot be convicted. According to the law in PA even:


PLEASE NOTE THE "OR" that I highlighted.


As for the rest of it, by stating the following


You just told someone to violate the law which is this:


Meaning the person in PA who listens to you automatically got their license suspended for 12 months. MORON.

Now considering the OP is from Georgia, how was anything you posted relevant? Let alone correct for PA?[/QUOTE]


hey that refusal does not apply to PORTABLE/HAND held device in PA... I said you can refuse that...not the mechine at the station.... or Blood read what I wrote....

 

[moburkes]

But, yep, a 2 day class made the police officer an expert. Just like your alcoholism made you one.

 

[hoss1]

But, yep, a 2 day class made the police officer an expert. Just like your alcoholism made you one.

if a 2 day class makes someone an expert.. we got some issues then..

second I would take my doc MEDICAL opinion over the cops so called expert opinion any day. I bet a jury/judge would as well

 

[hoss1]

CHEMICAL TESTING TO DETERMINE AMOUNT OF ALCOHOL OR CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE
Section 1547 of the Vehicle Code
Any person who drives, operates or is in actual physical control of the movement of a motor vehicle in Pennsylvania shall be deemed to have given consent to one or more chemical tests of breath, blood or urine for the purposes of determining the alcoholic content of blood or the presence of a controlled substance if a police officer has reasonable grounds to believe that person to have been driving, operating or in actual physical control of the movement of the motor vehicle:

While under the influence of alcohol or a controlled substance or both; or

which was involved in an accident in which the operator or passenger of any vehicle involved or a pedestrian required treatment at a medical facility or was killed.
If a person refuses to submit to a chemical test, the testing shall not be conducted but upon notice by the police officer, the Department of Transportation shall suspend the operating privilege of the person for a period of 12 months.

Meaning the person in PA who listens to you automatically got their license suspended for 12 months. MORON.

Now considering the OP is from Georgia, how was anything you posted relevant? Let alone correct for PA?
__________________
Parents should remember two things: Love your kids more than you hate your ex (or soon to be ex) and when you have children the relationship with the other parent is until death parts you.



IT IS CORRECT FOR PA.

You can turn down the portable device... NOT THE MECHINE at the station or the Blood draw.. you can but will lose your DL then...

READ WHAT I WROTE... instead of reading what you want