<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: When a Breath Test Refusal is not a Refusal</title>
	<atom:link href="/when-a-breath-test-refusal-is-not-a-refusal/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://winbackyourlife.org/when-a-breath-test-refusal-is-not-a-refusal/</link>
	<description>Survive Your Michigan DUI Arrest - CALL (248) 306-9159 for your FREE case review</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Nov 2010 22:14:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Boyle Obtains Total Victory for Client Accused of Drunk Driving and Breath Test Refusal &#124; Michigan DUI Help</title>
		<link>https://winbackyourlife.org/when-a-breath-test-refusal-is-not-a-refusal/comment-page-1/#comment-64</link>
		<dc:creator>Boyle Obtains Total Victory for Client Accused of Drunk Driving and Breath Test Refusal &#124; Michigan DUI Help</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2009 17:20:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://winbackyourlife.org/?p=640#comment-64</guid>
		<description>[...] This is because the Circuit Court agreed with our arguments, and reversed the ruling of the Hearing Officer as we were able to show that the hearing officer&#8217;s opinion agreeing with the deputy and not our client was &#8220;arbitrary and capricious,&#8221; or stated differently, &#8220;clearly an abuse or unwarranted exercise of discretion&#8221; and &#8220;not supported by competent, material, and substantial evidence on the whole record.&#8221;  For more information on this topic see &#8220;When a Breath Test Refusal is not a Refusal.&#8221; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] This is because the Circuit Court agreed with our arguments, and reversed the ruling of the Hearing Officer as we were able to show that the hearing officer&#8217;s opinion agreeing with the deputy and not our client was &#8220;arbitrary and capricious,&#8221; or stated differently, &#8220;clearly an abuse or unwarranted exercise of discretion&#8221; and &#8220;not supported by competent, material, and substantial evidence on the whole record.&#8221;  For more information on this topic see &#8220;When a Breath Test Refusal is not a Refusal.&#8221; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
