 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
STATE v. GONZALEZ3/21/1989
t [Hancich] was merely impaired, and not under the influence, cannot be excluded as a matter of law" was dictum. Consequently, Hancich is not controlling in the present case.
Because General Statutes (Rev. to 1985) 14-227a (b)may be proven only by evidence that the defendant's blood alcohol content at the time of the alleged offense was greater than .07 percent and less than .1 percent, and because there was no evidence introduced concerning the defendant's blood alcohol content, a lesser offense instruction of operating while impaired was not warranted. State v. Whistnant, supra.
The judgment of the Appellate Court is affirmed.
In this opinion the other justices concurred.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Connecticut DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|