Wyo. Stat. § 31-6-105
Method of performing chemical analysis; persons
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WY-LEGwyoleg.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
permitted to draw blood; request by arrested person for test;
information made available; evidence of refusal to take test.
(a) Chemical analysis of the person's blood, breath or
urine to be considered valid under this section, shall be
performed according to methods approved by the department of
health and by an individual possessing a valid permit to conduct
the analysis. Permits shall be issued by the department of
health for this purpose. The department of health may promulgate
and approve satisfactory methods in order to ascertain the
qualifications of individuals permitted to conduct the analysis
and shall issue to qualified individuals permits which are
subject to termination or revocation by the department of
health.
(b) When a person undergoes a blood test required by a
peace officer under this act, only a physician, registered
nurse, qualified clinical or laboratory technician or other
person who routinely does venipunctures at the direction of a
physician may withdraw blood for the purpose of determining the
alcohol concentration or controlled substance content therein.
This limitation does not apply to the taking of other specimens.
(c) A person arrested for any offense allegedly committed
while the person was driving or in actual physical control of a
motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or a
controlled substance to a degree which renders him incapable of
safely driving the vehicle, may request the peace officer to
have a chemical test or tests made of the arrested person's
blood, breath or urine for the purpose of determining the
alcohol or controlled substance content of the arrested person's
blood. If the tests are available they shall be performed in or
near the locality where the arrest was made as promptly as
possible after the arrest.
(d) The person tested may, at his own expense, have any
qualified person of his own choosing administer a chemical test
or tests in addition to any administered at the direction of a
peace officer. The failure or inability to obtain an additional
test by a person does not preclude the admissibility in evidence
of the test or tests taken at the direction of a peace officer.
(e) Upon the request of a person who undergoes a chemical
test or tests as required by a peace officer, full information
concerning the test or tests shall be made available to the
person or his attorney.
(f) Repealed By Laws 2011, Ch. 178, § 2.Notes of Decisions
Cited in 21
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1979–2024 · leading case: Devin Jay Hardman v. The State of Wyoming
Devin Jay Hardman v. The State of Wyoming (2020)
“He appeals, claiming the admission of his BAC was error because the State failed to establish his blood analysis was performed according to methods approved by the Wyoming Department of Health, as required by Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 31-6-105 (a). Mr. Hardman argues the admission of…”
Robert Olaf Anderson v. The State of Wyoming (2014)
“[114] Pursuant to our well-established rules for statutory interpretation, 3 we find Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 31-6-105 (e) clear and unambiguous.”
City of Laramie v. Mengel (1983)
“If such review is available, the substantive question to be resolved is whether the Municipal Judges of the City of Laramie erred in their conclusion that § 31-6-105(f), W.S. 1977, as adopted and made applicable within the City of Laramie pursuant to § 10.”
Miller v. Wyoming Department of Health (2012)
“[T5] On April 5, 2011, Miller and Gonzalez sent a letter to the WDOH requesting that it retroactively decertify the officers' permits to perform chemical breath testing "for failing to maintain their certification requirements in accordance with W.S. § 31-6-105, et al and…”
Romsa v. State ex rel. Wyoming Department of Transportation (2012)
“[139] Having found that the OAH, and subsequently the district court, did not err in finding that the WYDOT presented sufficient evidence in the certified record to establish during the administrative hearing "that the chemical testing [of Romsal was conducted using methods…”
Bryant v. STATE EX REL. DEPT. OF TRANSP. (2002)
“He maintains that the record contains no evidence that Officer Bisceglia provided any proof to demonstrate that he possessed a valid permit to conduct chemical testing pursuant to Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 31-6-105 (a) (LexisNexis 2001).”
Wheeler v. State (1985)
“Section 31-6-105(a), W.S.1977 (November 1984 Replacement), provides in pertinent part: “(a) Chemical analysis * * * shall have been performed according to the methods approved by the division of health and medical services of the department of health and social services * * The…”
Joelson v. State (1984)
“The issue on appeal, as worded by the appellant, is as follows: “[Wjhether the chemical analysis of the appellant’s blood introduced at trial was erroneously admitted into evidence at the appellant’s trial on an alleged violation of Wyoming Statute Section 31-5-233 as the State…”
Hwang v. State, Department of Transportation (2011)
“Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 31-6-105 (a) provides that, in order for a chemical test to be valid, the test must be performed according to the methods approved by the Department of Health.”
Sandy City v. Larson (1987)
“1983) (Wyo. Stat. § 31-6-105(f) (1977) (amended 1985)).”
Steven P. Flauding, Jr. v. State of Wyoming ex rel. Wyoming Department of Transportation (2021)
“The examiner also found that the breathalyzer results could be considered because failure or inability to obtain an independent chemical test did not make the breath test inadmissible under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 31-6-105 (d). The OAH therefore upheld WYDOT’s license suspension and…”
State v. Heiner (1984)
“Mengel, supra, the substantive issue was the constitutionality of § 31-6-105(f), W.S. 1977, as adopted by the Laramie Municipal Code, which statute and code provision hold that evidence of a driver's refusal to submit to a blood-alcohol test could be used against him in court…”
— Wyo. Stat. § 31-6-105(a) — 10 cases
Robert Olaf Anderson v. The State of Wyoming (2014)
“[114] Pursuant to our well-established rules for statutory interpretation, 3 we find Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 31-6-105 (e) clear and unambiguous.”
Miller v. Wyoming Department of Health (2012)
“[T5] On April 5, 2011, Miller and Gonzalez sent a letter to the WDOH requesting that it retroactively decertify the officers' permits to perform chemical breath testing "for failing to maintain their certification requirements in accordance with W.S. § 31-6-105, et al and…”
Romsa v. State ex rel. Wyoming Department of Transportation (2012)
“[139] Having found that the OAH, and subsequently the district court, did not err in finding that the WYDOT presented sufficient evidence in the certified record to establish during the administrative hearing "that the chemical testing [of Romsal was conducted using methods…”
Wheeler v. State (1985)
“Section 31-6-105(a), W.S.1977 (November 1984 Replacement), provides in pertinent part: “(a) Chemical analysis * * * shall have been performed according to the methods approved by the division of health and medical services of the department of health and social services * * The…”
Devin Jay Hardman v. The State of Wyoming (2020)
“He appeals, claiming the admission of his BAC was error because the State failed to establish his blood analysis was performed according to methods approved by the Wyoming Department of Health, as required by Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 31-6-105 (a). Mr. Hardman argues the admission of…”
— Wyo. Stat. § 31-6-105(b) — 1 case
Joelson v. State (1984)
“The issue on appeal, as worded by the appellant, is as follows: “[Wjhether the chemical analysis of the appellant’s blood introduced at trial was erroneously admitted into evidence at the appellant’s trial on an alleged violation of Wyoming Statute Section 31-5-233 as the State…”
— Wyo. Stat. § 31-6-105(d) — 2 cases
State v. Chastain (1979)
Steven P. Flauding, Jr. v. State of Wyoming ex rel. Wyoming Department of Transportation (2021)
“The examiner also found that the breathalyzer results could be considered because failure or inability to obtain an independent chemical test did not make the breath test inadmissible under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 31-6-105 (d). The OAH therefore upheld WYDOT’s license suspension and…”
— Wyo. Stat. § 31-6-105(e) — 3 cases
Robert Olaf Anderson v. The State of Wyoming (2014)
“[114] Pursuant to our well-established rules for statutory interpretation, 3 we find Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 31-6-105 (e) clear and unambiguous.”
Devin Jay Hardman v. The State of Wyoming (2020)
“He appeals, claiming the admission of his BAC was error because the State failed to establish his blood analysis was performed according to methods approved by the Wyoming Department of Health, as required by Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 31-6-105 (a). Mr. Hardman argues the admission of…”
— Wyo. Stat. § 31-6-105(f) — 4 cases
City of Laramie v. Mengel (1983)
“If such review is available, the substantive question to be resolved is whether the Municipal Judges of the City of Laramie erred in their conclusion that § 31-6-105(f), W.S. 1977, as adopted and made applicable within the City of Laramie pursuant to § 10.”
Sandy City v. Larson (1987)
“1983) (Wyo. Stat. § 31-6-105(f) (1977) (amended 1985)).”
State v. Heiner (1984)
“Mengel, supra, the substantive issue was the constitutionality of § 31-6-105(f), W.S. 1977, as adopted by the Laramie Municipal Code, which statute and code provision hold that evidence of a driver's refusal to submit to a blood-alcohol test could be used against him in court…”
Stogner v. State (1990)
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.