 |
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Avant v. State8/9/2001 ments, Sellers was attempting to mislead Avant or otherwise dissuade him from calling other hospitals to arrange the test.
In Pruitt v. State, we held that the defendant was not impeded from obtaining an independent test based on facts strikingly similar to those in the instant case. In Pruitt, the officer suggested the hospital at which the defendant could obtain the test, called the hospital and gave the phone to the accused. However, no additional test was performed because the accused was ultimately unable to pay for it. Similarly here, the defendant was unable to pay for the test, the officer suggested a hospital and called or allowed the defendant to call that hospital to arrange the test. The fact that the officer told defendant that he would have to pay for the test at whichever facility he chose does not constitute a denial of the defendant's right to obtain the test. As in Pruitt, the facts in this case "support the trial court's findings that the officer made a reasonable effort to accommodate defendant's efforts to obtain an independent test and that he was not impeded from doing so by any conduct on the part of law enforcement." Accordingly, we affirm.
Judgment affirmed. Blackburn, C. J., and Pope, P. J., concur.
Page 1 2 Georgia DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|