In Copelin v. State, 659 P.2d 1206 (Alaska 1983) the Alaska Supreme Court held that when a person who has been arrested for driving under the influence asks to consult an attorney, AS 12.25.150(b) and Alaska Rule of Criminal Procedure 5(b) require that the arrestee be afforded a reasonable opportunity to do so before deciding whether to submit to a breath test. Alaska Criminal Rule 5(b) provides: Immediately after arrest, the prisoner shall have the right forthwith to telephone or otherwise to communicate with both an attorney and any relative or friend. Any attorney at law entitled to practice in the courts of Alaska, at the request of either the prisoner or any relative or friend of the prisoner, shall have the right forthwith to visit the prisoner in private. The Court held that if a person arrested for driving while intoxicated asks to contact an attorney, AS 12.25.150(b) and Alaska Criminal Rule 5(b) require that the arrestee be afforded a reasonable opportunity to do so before being required to decide whether to submit to a breath test. If the police do not allow the arrestee that opportunity, evidence of the arrestee's breath test result, or his refusal to take the breath test, must be suppressed. This statutory right is not an absolute one, "but, rather, a limited one of reasonable time and opportunity that can be reconciled with the implied consent statutes." Moreover, law enforcement officers have no affirmative duty to inform arrestees of the right to contact an attorney; the duty of law enforcement is to not "unreasonably interfere" with attempts to contact counsel. The supreme court held that when an arrestee asks to contact an attorney, AS 12.25.150(b) and Criminal Rule 5(b) require that the arrestee be given "a reasonable opportunity to do so before being required to decide whether or not to submit to a breathalyzer test." (659 P.2d at 1208.)