People v. Vannesse
Annotate this CaseThe failure to advise the arrestee of his statutory right to choose between a breath and blood test does not run afoul of any constitutional restraint. The Vehicle Code provides that, if a person is lawfully arrested for driving under the influence of a drug or a combination of a drug and alcohol, he shall be advised that he has the choice of submitting to either a blood or breath test. Notwithstanding this statutory directive, the Court of Appeal held that if a peace officer advises the arrestee that his only choice is to submit to a blood test, the test results are admissible in a criminal proceeding provided that the arrestee freely and voluntarily consents to a blood test. In this case, the court affirmed the denial of defendant's motion to suppress the results of a chemical test of defendant's blood where there was ample evidence that he freely and voluntarily consented to a chemical test of his blood.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.