Roach

People v. Roach

Good Law
108 Cal. App. 3d 891·166 Cal. Rptr. 801·1980 Cal. App. LEXIS 2122
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 4, 1980Crim. 20667California598 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kroninger, J.

Lawrence Rea Roach appeals from a judgment rendered by the municipal court after a jury found him guilty of driving a motor vehicle under the combined influence of alcohol and drugs. (Veh. Code, § 23102.) The cause is before us on certification after appeal to the appellate department of the superior court. (Code Civ. Proc., § 911.)

A highway patrol officer stopped appellant after seeing his car weaving on the highway. The officer saw “track marks,” characteristic of narcotics users, on appellant’s forearms. After administering a field sobriety test which appellant performed poorly, the officer told appellant a chemical test was required. Appellant submitted to a breath test, which indicated a blood alcohol level of .08 percent. The officer then asked appellant to supply a urine sample, by reason of “the drug symptomology which [he] exhibited,” telling him that the purpose of the test was to detect the presence or absence of drugs in his system. Appellant refused.

The municipal court denied a pretrial motion to preclude use, as evidence of consciousness of guilt, of testimony by the officer that appellant had refused to provide a urine specimen after the officer told…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.