The discretionary appeal to this court was allowed only as to "Proposition of Law One," which states:
"Failure to advise a defendant of his right to an independent chemical test violates both the defendant's statutory and constitutional rights and must result in a suppression of the test results."
The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed on the authority of Hilliard v. Elfrink (1996),
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.