clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e
  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search search for:
clear space
white space
Session Laws, 1993
Volume 772, Page 3007   View pdf image
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

WILLIAM DONALD SCHAEFER, Governor                            Ch. 609

(2) A PERSON WHO INITIALLY REFUSES TO TAKE A TEST MAY CURE
WITHDRAW THE INITIAL REFUSAL AND SUBSEQUENTLY CONSENT TO TAKE THE
TEST IF THE SUBSEQUENT CONSENT:

(I)       IS UNEQUIVOCAL;

(II)     DOES NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INTERFERE WITH THE TIMELY
AND EFFICACIOUS ADMINISTRATION OF THE TEST; AND

(III)    IS GIVEN BY THE PERSON:

1.        BEFORE THE DELAY IN TESTING WOULD MATERIALLY
AFFECT THE OUTCOME OF THE TEST; AND

2.        A. FOR THE PURPOSE OF A TEST FOR DETERMINING
ALCOHOL CONCENTRATION, WITHIN 2 HOURS OF THE PERSON'S APPREHENSION; OR

B. FOR THE PURPOSE OF A TEST FOR DETERMINING THE
DRUG OR CONTROLLED DANGEROUS SUBSTANCE CONTENT OF THE PERSON'S
BLOOD, WITHIN 3 HOURS OF THE PERSON'S APPREHENSION.

(2) (3) IN DETERMINING WHETHER A PERSON'S CONSENT TO TAKE A
TEST SUBSEQUENT TO
PERSON HAS WITHDRAWN AN INITIAL REFUSAL CURES THE
INITIAL REFUSAL UNDER
FOR THE PURPOSES OF PARAGRAPH (1) OF THIS
SUBSECTION, AMONG THE FACTORS THAT THE ADMINISTRATION SHALL CONSIDER
ARE THE FOLLOWING:

(I)       WHETHER THE TEST WOULD HAVE BEEN ADMINISTERED
PROPERLY:

1.        FOR THE PURPOSE OF A TEST FOR DETERMINING
ALCOHOL CONCENTRATION, WITHIN 2 HOURS OF THE PERSON'S APPREHENSION; OR

2.         FOR THE PURPOSE OF A TEST FOR DETERMINING THE
DRUG OR CONTROLLED DANGEROUS SUBSTANCE CONTENT OF THE PERSON'S
BLOOD, WITHIN 3 HOURS OF THE PERSON'S APPREHENSION;

(II)     WHETHER A QUALIFIED PERSON, AS DEFINED IN § 10-304 OF
THE COURTS ARTICLE, TO ADMINISTER THE TEST AND TESTING EQUIPMENT WERE
READILY AVAILABLE;

(III)    WHETHER THE DELAY IN TESTING WOULD HAVE INTERFERED
WITH THE ADMINISTRATION OF A TEST TO ANOTHER PERSON:

(IV)    WHETHER THE DELAY IN TESTING WOULD HAVE INTERFERED
WITH THE ATTENTION TO OTHER DUTIES OF THE ARRESTING OFFICER OR A
QUALIFIED PERSON, AS DEFINED IN § 10-304 OF THE COURTS ARTICLE;

(V)     WHETHER THE PERSON'S SUBSEQUENT CONSENT TO TAKE THE
TEST WAS MADE IN GOOD FAITH; AND

(VI)    WHETHER THE CONSENT AFTER THE INITIAL REFUSAL WAS
WHILE THE PERSON WAS STILL IN POLICE CUSTODY.

- 3007 -

 

clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Session Laws, 1993
Volume 772, Page 3007   View pdf image
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  October 11, 2023
Maryland State Archives