Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/321206565/United-States-v-Carly-Ahlstrom-4th-Cir-2013
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 18:03:53+00:00

Document:
opinion, in which Chief Judge Traxler and Judge Thacker joined.
while intoxicated, in violation of 36 C.F.R. 4.23(a)(2).
used to prove her intoxication.
violation of 36 C.F.R. 4.2, incorporating Va. Code Ann.
liters of breath (Citation 3326986).
See J.A. at 7, 22-23.
in violation of her Fourth Amendment rights.
See J.A. at 8, 21.
suspicion to justify the stop.
The trial followed immediately thereafter.
National Airport in Alexandria, Virginia.
excessively over the speed limit.
to provide visibility from a distance of 50 feet to the rear.
Id. at 30-31, 45; see Va. Code Ann. 46.2-1013.
in Chapter I, Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
see the back of [the] car . . . and not see [its] tag light.
time whether the license plate was properly illuminated.
another two-tenths of a mile.
stopped the vehicle sooner because she was not fully clothed.
tests indicated a high probability that she was intoxicated.
arrest and transported her to the Park Police station.
been driving, but did so anyway.
as an Intoximeter EC/IR-II (the Intoximeter).
provided Ahlstrom with water to rinse out her mouth.
Intoximeter was operating properly at the time.
See id. at 93, 154.
BrAC was 0.116 grams of alcohol per 210 liters of breath.
alcohol per 210 liters of breath.
or more per 210 liters of breath, in violation of 36 C.F.R.
District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.
found sufficient evidence to justify the vehicle stop.
district court denied the appeal.
timely notice of appeal to this Court.
in finding sufficient evidence to support the vehicle stop.
States v. Bursey, 416 F.3d 301, 305 (4th Cir. 2005).
statutes and regulations) are reviewed de novo.
favorable to the prevailing party.
the light most favorable to the Government.
been suppressed as fruit of the poisonous tree.
Digiovanni, 650 F.3d 498, 506 (4th Cir. 2011) (citing Whren v.
United States, 517 U.S. 806, 809-10 (1996)).
be unreasonable under the circumstances.
United States v. Kellam, 568 F.3d 125, 136 (4th Cir.
vehicle . . . .).
demanding . . . than probable cause.
cert. denied, ___ U.S. ____, 133 S. Ct. 1851 (2013).
Branch, 537 F.3d at 336 (quoting Wardlow, 528 U.S.
at 123) (alteration in Branch).
United States v. Powell, 666 F.3d 180, 186 (4th Cir. 2011).
by Va. Code Ann. 46.2-1013.
distance of 50 feet to the rear.
tag was not visible in the dark.
illuminated, he would have been able to see it.
would have been reasonable, based on the evidence.
1271, 1276 (11th Cir. 2003)).
certainty, only a minimal level of objective justification.
waters administered by the National Park Service, 36 C.F.R.
the operator is required to submit to a breath alcohol test.
reliability operated by personnel certified in its use.
prescribed by 36 C.F.R. 4.23(a)(2).
United States v. Reid, 929 F.2d 990, 994 (4th Cir.
and reliability, as required under 36 C.F.R. 4.23(c)(4).
States v. Daras, 164 F.3d 626, 1998 WL 726748, at *1-2 (4th Cir.
Oct. 16, 1998) (per curiam).
administered properly. See Daras, 1998 WL 726748, at *1-2.
[the] result and showing it produces an accurate result.
admissibility of the Intoximeter test results.
constitute statements, and the machines are not declarants.
testimony of the analyst who had performed the certification).
subject to judicial notice by this Court.
And this is for good reason.
Fed. Reg. 30459-02 (Nov. 5, 1973).
Specifications for Devices to Measure Breath Alcohol, 58 Fed.
tests, conducted semi-annually or as necessary.
calibrate and conduct accuracy checks.
months before it was used for Ahlstrom.
out of operation if a malfunction is detected.
reliance on United States v. Foster, 829 F. Supp. 2d 354 (W.D.
influence, in violation of 36 C.F.R. 4.23(a)(1), is misplaced.
accurate, it would produce an error reading and not operate.
time using the machine for a case-related test.
regarding the accuracy of the testing equipment.
court found the test results admissible.
was in good working order on the night in question.
evidential use by the NHTSA.
knowledge of the self-tests design.
(D. Mass. 2010) (admitting BrAC test results under 36 C.F.R.
no indication of a malfunction).
sufficiency of the evidence challenge.
51 F.3d 1239, 1245 (4th Cir. 1995).
itself if its internal diagnostic tests showed any malfunction.
sufficient to support the conviction.

References: v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.