Dollar v. State

George Rose Smith, Justice.

In appealing from a DWI conviction Dollar argues that a prospective juror should have been excused for cause and that a blood alcohol test by means of a device called an Intoxilyzer does not satisfy the statutory requirement of being a “chemical analysis.” Ark. Stat. Ann. §75-1031.1 (Supp. 1985). It is the latter contention that brings the case to us under Rule 29(l)(c). Neither point has merit.

The juror in question was peremptorily challenged by the accused after the trial judge had refused a challenge for cause. In the selection of the jury the defense exhausted…