 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
North Carolina v. Howren12/4/1984
required by the statute to prove that preventive maintenance was performed on the breathalyzer, and it is under no duty to do so. Martin, 46 N.C. App. at 520, 265 S.E.2d at 459-60. Putting the burden on defendant to object and show that preventive maintenance was not performed on the breathalyzer does not violate the rule of Mullaney v. Wilbur. Defendant's assignment of error on this point is overruled.
After a careful consideration of the law we find the challenged portions of the Safe Roads Act to be constitutional and affirm the order of the Superior Court reinstating the charges against defendant.
Affirmed.
Disposition
Affirmed.
|