The accused was charged with refusing to provide a breath sample into an Approved Screening Device (ASD).
After being stopped for driving with high beams on and an open gas-cap door, the accused exhibited glassy eyes and delayed responses, prompting an ASD demand.
The accused failed to provide a suitable sample after six attempts, with the final three attempts involving no airflow.
The court found the demand was lawful, the ASD was functioning properly, and the accused had a meaningful opportunity to comply.
The court concluded the accused's failure was purposeful and entered a finding of guilt.
