Lisa Boggs

The driver could not prove that she had properly rescinded her initial refusal to take the state-administered chemical test, because the arresting officer was unable to observe her for the entire duration of her arrest, a factor the courts must consider in determining whether a driver properly rescinded a refusal to submit to chemical testing. […]

The driver, who was under arrest for driving under the influence (DUI), refused to take the breath test designated by the arresting officer, insisting instead he would only take a blood test.  Refusing to take the test designated by the arresting officer is tantamount to a refusal to submit to chemical testing, even though a

During an arrest for driving under the influence (DUI), an arresting officer is only required to read the implied consent warning and is not obligated to ensure that the driver understands the warning. Thus, it is of no consequence that Petitioner claimed she had difficulty understanding the warning because English was not her first language.