Desmond v. Superior Court

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that two subsections of the driving-under-the-influence statute were different crimes because one proscribed driving under the influence of liquor while the other proscribed driving over a certain blood alcohol level
• holding test results admissible without retrograde extrapolation
• construing former versions of both A.R.S. §§ 28-692(A) and (E), and holding that, in order for the jury to be instructed on the subsection (E) presumption, “there must be testimony relating the [alcohol concentration] back to the time of the arrest”
• BAC test results must relate back to time of driving for criminal conviction under section 28-692
• “The proper procedure to be followed when a party offers [a] BAC result into evidence without any relation-back testimony is for the court to admit the portion of the test result that indicates the presence of alcohol in the blood— but not the percentage . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).