State v. Bayer

Defendant was convicted of driving under the influence of a controlled substance (DUII-CS), ORS 813.010. On appeal, he assigns error to the trial courts denial of his motion to suppress an incriminating statement made in what he contends were compelling circumstances before he received Miranda warnings. He also challenges the courts failure to dismiss the charges against him for lack of a speedy trial. And he assigns error to the courts decision to admit expert testimony by a drug recognition expert (DRE) regarding his administration of the so-called DRE protocol, on the ground that the final step of the protocol--the toxicological testing of defendants urine--was, in defendants view, inadequate. We reject all of defendants arguments and affirm.