Court Opinion

ID: 9518316
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 00:49:42.213109+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:28:17.167790
License: Public Domain

UHLENHOPP, Justice
(concurring specially).
I concur in the court’s opinion but think defendant’s refusal to take chapter 321B blood and breath tests was admissible whether the FAIT test was or was not quantitative.
As the court states, “Officer Rector then asked defendant to take a ‘FAIT’ test, informing him the test results could not be used against him and the test was merely for the purpose of making a probable cause determination.” (Italics added.) I believe an officer must comply with chapter 321B procedures when he proceeds under chapter S21B. Here the officer was not proceeding under chapter 321B when he obtained the FAIT test. He told defendant that “the test results could not be used against him.
Since the officer was not proceeding under chapter 321B in obtaining the FAIT test, I see no reason why he could not subsequently, and within the two-hour period after arrest, proceed under chapter 321B. When Officer Rector did proceed under chapter 321B, he of course had to follow its *539procedures — but that he did. As the court further states, “The statutory procedures were followed and defendant refused the offered blood and breath tests.”
I believe, therefore, that defendant’s refusal to take the chapter 321B tests was admissible, and that the FAIT test was irrelevant to the question of the admissibility of the refusal to take the chapter 321B tests.