State v. Franks

MARTIN, Judge.

Defendant contends that the trial court committed reversible error by allowing into evidence testimony concerning the results of the breathalyzer test administered to him without first requiring the State to establish a proper foundation for such testimony. His contention has merit, entitling him to a new trial.

G.S. 20-139.1(b) provides:

Approval of Valid Test Methods; Licensing Chemical Analysts. — A chemical analysis, to be valid, must be performed in accordance with the provisions of this section. The chemical analysis must be performed according to methods approved by the…