State v. Union
State v. Union
Opinion of the Court
Joseph Union was arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol on January 28, 1995. Michael Ginn was arrested for driving
1. The trial courts granted the motions to exclude and suppress the results of the State designated alcohol tests because the implied consent warnings given to Union and Ginn did not contain the specific language required by OCGA § 40-5-67.1 (b) (2).
2. The evidentiary record shows that under former Code § 40-5-67.1, the implied consent warnings read to Union and Ginn by the arresting officers were sufficient. See Howard v. State, 219 Ga. App. 228, 229 (2) (465 SE2d 281) (1995), and Howard v. Cofer, 150 Ga. App. 579 (2) (258 SE2d 195) (1979). Accordingly, the trial courts erred in holding that the State failed to demonstrate compliance with the implied consent statute.
Judgments reversed.
Ginn was also charged with the offenses of no proof of insurance, open container, carrying a pistol without a license, and carrying a deadly weapon at a public gathering.
During the regular 1995 session, the legislature amended OCGA § 40-5-67.1 and thereby required that specific language be used as the implied consent warning in all cases pending at the time of its approval by the Governor on April 21, 1995.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- STATE OF GEORGIA v. UNION STATE OF GEORGIA v. GINN
- Status
- Published