Legal Opinion

Walk v. State, Dept. of Licensing

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided May 13, 1999No. 16914-6-IIIPublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSweeney, J.

— WAC 448-13-040 requires several safeguards that must be “observed by the operator” before a BAC Verifier DataMaster test is performed. The operator must determine that the person does not vomit, eat, drink or smoke at least 15 minutes prior to the administration of the BAC test. WAC 448-13-040.

Larry Walk was arrested for driving under the influence. An officer—not the BAC operator—observed Mr. Walk for the required 15-minute period before the operator administered the BAC test. The first question here is whether the officer who conducts the BAC test must actually observe the suspect during…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Franklin County Sheriff's Office v. SellersWashington Supreme Court · 1982
  2. State v. ChesterWashington Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Eastlake Community Council v. Roanoke Associates, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1973
  4. Department of Licensing v. LaxWashington Supreme Court · 1995
  5. Valentine v. Department of LicensingCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1995

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

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Cannon v. Department of LicensingWashington Supreme Court · 2002
  2. City of Seattle v. AllisonWashington Supreme Court · 2002
  3. City of Seattle v. AllisonWashington Supreme Court · 2002
  4. LeMond v. STATE, DEPT. OF LICENSINGCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2008
  5. LeMond v. Department of LicensingCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2008

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

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

Powered by the Exa API