# McManus v. State

> Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · April 24, 1985 · 695 P.2d 884

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9546262

## Case

- **Full name:** Don McMANUS, Appellant, v. STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
- **Decided:** April 24, 1985
- **Citations:** 695 P.2d 884
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Bussey
- **Judges:** Brett, Bussey, Parks
- **Cited by:** 1 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9546262

## Opinion text

BUSSEY, Presiding Judge,
concurring:
Although aware that he had failed to establish that the maintenance procedures on the breathalyzer equipment had been complied with, the prosecutor failed to elicit sufficient testimony to establish compliance. That he intended to do so is evidenced by his statements in the record; that he apparently forgot to do so thereafter is equally supported by the record. The State’s assertion that the procedural requirements were established by Trooper Ruggs’ affirmative answer to a prosecuto-rial question regarding whether the trooper had set the machine up and gone through all the procedures he had been taught is patently frivolous, as it wholly omits what the procedures were and the manner of compliance.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9546262. Public record. Not legal advice.