 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Manke3/30/2000
A party may file with the Supreme Court a petition to review an adverse decision by the Court of Appeals. See Wis. Stat. § 808.10 and Rule 809.62.
Cornelia G. Clark Acting Clerk, Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
APPEAL from a judgment of the circuit court for Rock County: MICHAEL J. BYRON, Judge. Reversed.
.
Bruce Manke appeals from a judgment convicting him, after a jury trial, of driving with a prohibited alcohol concentration in his blood. The dispositive issue is whether the arresting officer's failure to read Manke the commercial driver's license provisions of Wisconsin's implied consent law-even though he was not engaged in commercial driving when arrested-renders the breath test results inadmissible. Because, as we have held in State v. Geraldson, 176 Wis. 2d 487, 500 N.W.2d 415 (Ct. App. 1993), the commercial-license warnings are mandatory under the law, we answer the question in the affirmative and reverse the judgment.
. Manke was apprehended by Milton Police Officer Michael Reimer under circumstances leading Reimer to believe he might be driving while intoxicated. Reimer took Manke to police headquarters and asked him to submit to a chemical test of his blood. Although, as he later testified at trial, Reimer was aware that Manke held both a regular and a commercial driver's license, he read Manke only those portions of the Informing the Accused Form relating to persons holding regular driver's licenses. Manke took the test and failed it, and the results were admitted into evidence at his trial. At the trial's conclusion, the jury found Manke not guilty of operating under the influence, but guilty of the companion charge of operating a vehicle with a prohibited blood-alcohol concentration. He appeals the judgment entered on that verdict.
. Under the implied consent law, police are required to provide certain information to drivers asked to submit to a chemical test of their blood. The information deals generally with (a) the effects on licensure of taking and failing the test, (b) the effects of refusing the test, (c) the availability of alternative tests, and (d) the fact that positive test results, or a refusal, may have consequences affecting a commercial license, if the driver has one. Specifically, Wis. Stat. § 343.305(4) (1997-98) states that, at the time the test is requested, the officer "shall read the following" to the driver:
You have either been arrested for an offense that involves driving or operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or both, or you are suspected of driving or being on duty time with respect to a commercial motor vehicle after consuming an intoxicating beverage.
This law enforcement agency now wants to test one or more samples of your breath, blood or urine to determine the concentration of alcohol or drugs in your system. If any test shows more alcohol in your system than the law permits while driving, your operating privilege will be suspended. If you refuse to take any test that this agency requests, your operating privilege will be revoked and you will be subject to other penalties. The test results or the fact that you refused testing can be used against you in court.
If you take all the requested tests, you may choose to take further tests. You may take the alternative test that this law enforcement agency provides free of charge. You also may have a test conducted by a qualified person of your choice at your expense. You, however, will have to make your own arrangements for that test.
If you have a commercial driver license or were operating a commercial motor vehicle, other consequences may result from
Page 1 2 3 Wisconsin DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|