State v. Bevan

I agree with the majority’s analysis of the admissibility of the vertical gaze nystagmus (VGN) test. I do not agree, however, with its conclusion that the error in admitting evidence of the test was not harmless. In my view, there is little likelihood that any error in admitting evidence of the VGN test results affected the verdict. I would affirm on that ground and therefore respectfully dissent.

*545First, there is abundant evidence of defendant’s intoxication. The arresting officer testified that he observed defendant driving 64 miles per hour (mph) in a 45 mph zone, quickly slam on the brakes…