The appellant, Roumen Marinov, appealed his convictions for operating a motor vehicle with over 80 mgs of alcohol in 100 ml of blood and impaired operation of a motor vehicle.
The appeal raised three issues: whether the breath tests were conducted "as soon as practicable," the trial judge's assessment of the testifying officer's note-taking and credibility, and whether the trial judge applied the correct standard of proof for the impaired driving conviction.
The court dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the trial judge's determination that the breath tests were conducted "as soon as practicable," his assessment of the officer's evidence despite note-taking issues, or his application of the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard for impaired driving, which was implicitly demonstrated throughout the judgment.