Washington State DUI

Washington State Jury Instructions

Relevant Alcohol Intoxication Evidence

NO. _____

Absence of observable symptoms of alcohol intoxication is relevant to the issue of whether a driver was under the influence of intoxicating liquor at the time he or she was driving. It is also relevant to the issue of whether a breath test result of 0.08 or more accurately establishes a breath alcohol concentration equivalent to one or more grams of alcohol per 210 liters of exhaled breath.

State v. Franco, 96 Wn.2d 816, 636 P.2d 1320 (1982)
State v. Clark, 593 P.2d 123 (Ore. 1979)

Breath Test

NO. ______

You may disregard the results of the test of the defendant’s breath if you entertain a reasonable doubt as to the accuracy of the test and the results thereof.

State v. Franco, 96 Wn.2d 816 (1982)
State v. Keller, 36 Wn. App. 110 (1983)

Other Competent Evidence | DUI

NO. ______

Under the laws of the state of Washington, a person has the right to refuse to submit to breath testing, also known as physical sobriety tests.

The fact that a person has exercised this right does not require you to conclude that the person therefore must be guilty of DUI. It is evidence that you may consider with other competent evidence presented in this case to determine whether the State has proved each element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.

RCW 46.20.308
State v. Staheli, 102 Wn.2d 305 (1984)


1001 Fourth Avenue, Suite 2388
Seattle, Washington 98154