accuracy test in Washington

2024His argument focuses on the word “any” without attempting to define a “foreign substance.” A “foreign substance” is defined as a substance that “adversely affect[s] the accuracy of test results.” City of Sunnyside v. Fernandez, 59 Wn.

2024App. 578, 582 , 799 P.2d 753 (1990).

2013Under RCW 46.61-.506(4)(a), breath tests are deemed admissible if the State produces prima facie evidence of eight statutory factors regarding the accuracy of the test. 7 The Washington Supreme Court recognizes that the DataMaster produces scientifically accurate, reliable test results when the eight criteria of RCW 46.61.506(4)(a) are met, satisfying the Frye test. 8 State v. Ford, 110 Wn.2d 827, 833 , 755 P.2d 806 (1988); see also State v. Straka, 116 Wn.2d 859, 870 , 810 P.2d 888 (1991).

2013Under RCW 46.61-.506(4)(a), breath tests are deemed admissible if the State produces prima facie evidence of eight statutory factors regarding the accuracy of the test. 7 The Washington Supreme Court recognizes that the DataMaster produces scientifically accurate, reliable test results when the eight criteria of RCW 46.61.506(4)(a) are met, satisfying the Frye test. 8 State v. Ford, 110 Wn.2d 827, 833 , 755 P.2d 806 (1988); see also State v. Straka, 116 Wn.2d 859, 870 , 810 P.2d 888 (1991).

2013Once the statutory foundational requirements are met, RCW 46.61.506(4)(c) specifies that all other challenges to the reliability or accuracy of the test "shall not preclude the admissibility of the test," but instead "may be considered by the trier of fact in determining what weight to give the test result." The Washington Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of these foundational requirements in Jensen, 158 Wn.2d at 399 .

2013Once the statutory foundational requirements are met, RCW 46.61.506(4)(c) specifies that all other challenges to the reliability or accuracy of the test “shall not preclude the admissibility of the test” but instead “may be considered by the trier of fact in determining what weight to give the test result.” The Washington Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of these foundational requirements in Jensen, 158 Wn.2d at 399 .

2010The drivers challenged the accuracy of the warning by arguing that the "in violation of" language could mislead a driver into thinking that "losing one's license is an inevitable consequence of merely being arrested." Id. at 676 , 50 P.3d 295 .

2010The drivers challenged the accuracy of the warning by arguing that the “in violation of” language could mislead a driver into thinking that “losing one’s license is an inevitable consequence of merely being arrested.” Id. at 676 .

2000While this approach may be the "standard professional practice," id. at 237 , it nevertheless is intended to guesstimate the withdrawal or diversion of such a small amount of water is within the tolerance of existing minimum flows and preexisting rights which the department is charged to protect.

2000While this approach may be the “standard professional practice,” Id. at 237 , it nevertheless is intended to guesstimate the withdrawal or diversion of such a small amount of water is within the tolerance of existing minimum flows and preexisting rights which the department is charged to protect.

1989Erdman, 64 Wn.2d at 288 .

1981Because the conviction did not rest alone on these results, doubts as to the accuracy of the test "would not have raised a reasonable doubt as to guilt which did not otherwise exist." Id.

1981We note the Edwards case was reversed on appeal to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, 577 F.2d 1119 (10th Cir. 1978).

1978Because the uniformed officers were not reasonably visible to one looking out the door, because the badge of the plain clothes detective was not plainly displayed and because the defendant was afforded no time to form a judgment concerning the accuracy of the claim to be law enforcement officers, defendant Ellis was faced with a situation resembling that in State v. Bresolin, 13 Wn.

1978App. 386 , 534 P.2d 1394 (1975), in which robbers entered a house falsely claiming to be federal agents.

1975App. 1972); entering upon a deliberate course of smoking, drinking and eating in an attempt to frustrate the accuracy of the test, despite a verbal offer to submit, Moseley v. Commonwealth, 492 S.W.2d 204 (Ky. App. 1973); and breathing into the machine lightly once, coupled with a subsequent refusal to breathe into it again, Newman v. Stinson, 489 S.W. 2d 826 (Ky. App. 1972).

1975App. 1972); entering upon a deliberate course of smoking, drinking and eating in an attempt to frustrate the accuracy of the test, despite a verbal offer to submit, Moseley v. Commonwealth, 492 S.W.2d 204 (Ky. App. 1973); and breathing into the machine lightly once, coupled with a subsequent refusal to breathe into it again, Newman v. Stinson, 489 S.W. 2d 826 (Ky. App. 1972).