Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

State v. Garrett

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided February 20, 1996No. 14464-0-IIIPublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSweeney, C.J.

WAC 448-14-020(3)(b) requires that "[b]lood samples for alcohol analysis shall be preserved with an anticoagulant . . . .” Ernest A. Garrett was arrested for driving while under the influence. RCW 46.61.502. It is undisputed that an anticoagulant was not added to his blood sample. Instead, the state toxicologist homogenized the sample with a tissue grinder to restore the blood to an unclotted state. According to the toxicologist, the lack of an anticoagulant did not change the results of the blood test because the homogenization process is scientifically reliable. We are asked here to decide…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital v. Franklin CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Clark v. PacificorpWashington Supreme Court · 1991
  3. Jenkins v. Bellingham Municipal CourtWashington Supreme Court · 1981
  4. State v. BarefieldWashington Supreme Court · 1988
  5. Clark v. HORSE RACING COMMISSIONWashington Supreme Court · 1986

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. State v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2008
  2. Sheehan v. Zoning Board of AppealsMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2005
  3. State v. BosioCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2001
  4. State v. HultenschmidtCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2004
  5. State v. BosioCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2001

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API