US Supreme Court ruled on DUI laws across America.

Laws in twelve states that impose criminal penalties on suspected drunk drivers who refuse to take a breath test to measure the alcohol in their bodies got the green light in Birchfield v. North Dakota.

Connecticut’s criminal refusal statute states, “[E]vidence of refusal to submit to test. In any criminal prosecution for a violation of subsection (a) of this section, evidence that the defendant refused to submit to a blood, breath or urine test requested in accordance with section 14-227b shall be admissible provided the requirements of subsection (b) of said section have been satisfied. If a case involving a violation of subsection (a) of this section is tried to a jury, the court shall instruct the jury as to any inference that may or may not be drawn from the defendant’s refusal to submit to a blood, breath or urine test.” Sec. 14-227a

A Refusal at the DMV per se hearing results in a hard 45-day suspension and a requirement of 6 months of an ignition interlock device. C.S.G. §§ 14-227b(k) and 14-227b(i)(2)(A).

The Supreme Court also held, laws which impose criminal penalties for failing to take a blood test violate the Constitution.

This does not apply to Connecticut, because refusal of a blood test was permissible under the Connecticut General Statutes. CSG §§ 14-227a(e), 14-227b(b)

Read more at the link below

Share →

Leave a Reply

Copyright © 2014 Winona W. Zimberlin - Disability Lawyer Hartford - All Rights Reserved.
Web Services by David Cosgrove Los Angeles Web Design

Hartford Connecticut Social Security disability lawyer, Winona W. Zimberlin, social security disability attorney ct, Connecticut social security disability attorney, Disability lawyer Hartford CT, State of Connecticut Disability Retirement, Education Law