Updates to our Terms of Use

We are updating our Terms of Use. Please carefully review the updated Terms before proceeding to our website.

Wednesday, March 27, 2024 | Back issues
Courthouse News Service Courthouse News Service

No Right to Counsel Before Breath Test in MA

BOSTON (CN) - Suspected drunk drivers in Massachusetts do not have a right to consult with an attorney before taking a breathalyzer test, the state's highest court ruled.

Timothea T. Neary-French unsuccessfully challenged the results of her breathalyzer test after being arrested in 2012 for operating under the influence, or OUI, in Lenox, Mass. A third party had drawn police attention to Neary-French after she was reportedly "bumping into" another car.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court previously ruled that there is no right to counsel prior to a breathalyzer test, but that was in 1989.

Neary-French was arrested for operating while under the influence of liquor and was given a breathalyzer without the opportunity to consult with a lawyer. She blew above 0.08, but later moved to suppress the breathalyzer results.

The Massachusetts Legislature amended its law for drunk driving in 2003. In 1989, a 0.08 blood-alcohol level was sufficient for the police officer to infer that the driver was operating under the influence. The 2003 amendment to the law removed the permissible inference, specifically making a 0.08 blood-alcohol level enough for an OUI charge.

The state supreme court previously held that a breathalyzer test was not a critical stage in criminal proceedings, and therefore there was no assumed right to counsel prior to taking the test.

Neary-French argued that the breathalyzer test had become a critical stage with the 2003 update to the state's OUI law, but the Massachusetts high court disagreed Monday.

Despite the law's amendment, the court reaffirmed its opinion that a person only has a right to counsel once the state has officially begun criminal proceedings.

"Because the decision whether to submit to a breathalyzer test takes place before the initiation of formal judicial proceedings, we conclude that there is no right to counsel at the breathalyzer stage under [article 12]," Justice Francis Spina wrote. "The term 'critical stage' is a term of art and only refers to actions and events postindictment or arraignment. The decision whether to submit to a breathalyzer is an important decision, but it is not a critical stage because the decision occurs before indictment and arraignment."

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court further noted that under state law, a driver automatically consents to a breathalyzer test when choosing to drive within the Commonwealth.

Categories / Uncategorized

Subscribe to Closing Arguments

Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.

Loading...