Jack Bryan Slagle v. State Texas

Appellants first ground of error complains that the trial court erred in submitting the instruction concerning the presumption of intoxication under Article 6701L -5, Section 3(a), V.A.C.S., because the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the facts required to establish said presumption. It is the contention of appellant that the testimony on the administration of the breathalyzer examination showed that the results of a breathalyzer test could vary according to a number of variables. These variables included the body temperature of the subject, the temperature of the subjects breath, whether the subject discharged alcohol through his saliva glands, the ratio of blood alcohol to alveolar alcohol, whether the subject hyperventilated, the time lapse between operation of the motor vehicle and administration of the breathalyzer test, the amount of solution in the test ampoule, and whether the subjects circulatory system was at equilibrium. However, it is noted that at no time did the appellant establish that these particular variables that might create error in the test results were applicable to him at the time the test was administered.