In Crim v. Anchorage, 903 P.2d 586 (Alaska App. 1995) the Court concluded that the defendant had validly waived his right to an independent chemical test because the record showed that he had been notified of this right, that he knew he had been arrested for drunk driving, and that he generally understood that the purpose of the test was to obtain evidence of his blood alcohol content. The Court ruled that Crim's waiver was valid even though he did not know the results of his breath test at the time he declined a blood test, and thus could not fully assess the advantages and disadvantages of obtaining a blood test. (Crim, 903 P.2d at 588.)