 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Tuttle10/18/2005
nformed Officer Howes that the only person he had contacted, his daughter, would not be coming. Further, defendant explicitly stated that he would not take the test. These facts firmly establish that defendant never exercised his right to have awitness present pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-16.2(a). We hold that N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-16.2(a) was not violated, and therefore defendant's refusal was properly admitted against him at trial. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-139.1(f); State v. Gregory, 154 N.C. App. 718, 721, 572 S.E.2d 838, 842 (2002) (The refusal to submit to an intoxilyzer test also is admissible as substantive evidence of guilt on a DWI charge.). This argument is without merit.
Because defendant has not argued his other assignments of error in his brief, they are deemed abandoned. N.C. R. App. P. Rule 28(b)(6) (2003).
NO ERROR.
Judges HUNTER and TYSON concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).
|