If I was Mr. Tessener I would have gone ballistic too. He is a lawyer, so he knew that THE TROOPER KNEW that he did NOT have to arrest Mrs. Tessener to test her. She did not refuse to test, she just said she wanted to have the test done in front of a witness because she was uncomfortable with the situation (bogus headlight and leaning into her window unnecessarily). She just did not want to be alone with this guy any longer thgan she absolutely had to. She did not ask to be arrested and probably did not know about her right to be tested before arrest. NCHP Trooper Wyrick did though. He could have easily advised her that if she was wished to submit to a prearrest chemical test she could accompany him to the police station and sign a written request for a CHEMICAL ANALYSIS BEFORE ARREST OR CHARGE. When she tested 0.00 he could have released her UNCHARGED without an order from a magistrate. It didn't go down that way because Wyrick didn't want it to. He wanted to hassle the woman and cuff her hands behind her back. HERE IS THE LAW -- General Statute 20-16.2(i) Right to Chemical Analysis before Arrest or Charge. - A person stopped or questioned by a law enforcement officer who is investigating whether the person may have committed an implied consent offense may request the administration of a chemical analysis before any arrest or other charge is made for the offense. Upon this request, the officer shall afford the person the opportunity to have a chemical analysis of his or her breath, if available, in accordance with the procedures required by G.S. 20-139.1(b). The request constitutes the person's consent to be transported by the law enforcement officer to the place where the chemical analysis is to be administered. Before the chemical analysis is made, the person shall confirm the request in writing and shall be notified:
(1) That the test results will be admissible in evidence and may be used against you in any implied consent offense that may arise;
(2) Your driving privilege will be revoked immediately for at least 30 days if the test result is 0.08 or more, 0.04 or more if you were driving a commercial vehicle, or 0.01 or more if you are under the age of 21.
(3) That if you fail to comply fully with the test procedures, the officer may charge you with any offense for which the officer has probable cause, and if you are charged with an implied consent offense, your refusal to submit to the testing required as a result of that charge would result in revocation of your driving privilege. The results of the chemical analysis are admissible in evidence in any proceeding in which they are relevant.
More information about formatting options