People v. Bransford
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
MOSK, J.
We granted review in these consolidated matters to consider whether the trial court should have allowed defendants convicted of driving with 0.08 percent or more of alcohol in their blood to challenge *888their breath-test results by showing that their personal ratio of breath-alcohol concentration to blood-alcohol concentration (the “partition ratio”) differed from the standard partition ratio that breath-testing machines use to convert breath-alcohol readings into blood-alcohol equivalents. As will appear, we conclude the trial court correctly excluded such evidence, and we…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Sandstrom v. MontanaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- County Court of Ulster Cty. v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Taylor v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- People v. DillonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1983
- State v. FrancoWashington Supreme Court · 1982
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Nelson v. City of IrvineCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- People v. McNealCalifornia Supreme Court · 2009
- People v. ScottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
- People v. PinkstonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003
- United States v. Eric James Thornton, Jr., AKA Seal BCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.