State v. Derov

2009 Ohio 1111, 903 N.E.2d 636, 121 Ohio St. 3d 269

Opinion

{¶ 1} The record in the trial court concerning the portable breathalyzer test used in this case is not sufficient to support either the statements in the opinion of the court of appeals regarding the use of the portable breathalyzer and the value of its test results or the judgment that the trial court should not have considered the results of the portable breath test. Accordingly, that portion of the judgment of the court of appeals is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the court of appeals for further proceedings.

{¶ 2} In view of the foregoing disposition of appellant’s Proposition of Law No. II, the notice of certified conflict is dismissed for want of a conflict.

{¶ 3} Sua sponte, the appeal is dismissed as to appellant’s Proposition of Law Nos. I and III as having been improvidently accepted.

{¶ 4} The opinion of the court of appeals may not be cited as authority except by the parties inter se.

Moyer, C.J., and Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell, and Cupp, JJ., concur. Pfeifer and Lanzinger, JJ., dissent in part and would dismiss the cause as having been improvidently accepted.