The Davenport court held that the officer has a duty to administer chemical tests according to methods that are designed to assure reliability. Similarly, California Evidence Code Section 664 gives the presumption that the officer's official duty has been "regularly performed," thus giving rise to an inference of the reliability of the test.

The result of the above propositions is that the burden of proof shifts to the defendant to show that the officer did not perform the test in a reliable way. The Davenport court held that due process is not offended by placing the burden of rebutting the reliability of chemical tests on the defendant. Law enforcement agencies have an official duty to perform blood-alcohol analyses by reliable methods complying with statutory and regulatory standards.

Read the entire article…

Tags: "Davenport" Issues at DMV Hearings

This entry was posted on Friday, March 16th, 2007 at 5:19 pm and is filed under Law & Legal. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.