McDaniel v. State
Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
706 So. 2d 1305 (1997)
Facts
Walter Todd McDaniel (defendant) was convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) and other traffic offenses. A trooper attempted to take two breath samples from McDaniel to determine McDaniel’s blood-alcohol level. McDaniel’s first breath sample reflected a .10 percent blood-alcohol rate, but McDaniel’s second breath sample yielded an invalid result because McDaniel did not produce enough breath for analysis. Over McDaniel’s objection, the trial court allowed the government to present the first breath-test result at trial. The trooper who arrested McDaniel also testified that McDaniel’s breath smelled like alcohol. McDaniel argued that he was severely ill from a chronic stomach disorder and that his intoxicated appearance was due to his illness and multiple prescribed medications. McDaniel appealed his DUI conviction, arguing that his blood-alcohol test did not strictly adhere to Alabama’s statutory regulations for breath testing.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Brown, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 710,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,600 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
