Intoxilyzer 5000 Test Georgia
In Jarriel v. State, 255 Ga. App. 305, 307 (3) (565 SE2d 521) (2002) the Court held that the failure to test an Intoxilyzer 5000 instrument quarterly did not mandate suppression of the results of a breath test administered by use of the instrument, because the state proved substantial compliance with the requirement that the Intoxilyzer 5000 undergo periodic testing; according to the inspection certificates, the machine functioned properly when it was tested; and the officer who administered the test in that case was certified to administer breath tests and testified that the Intoxilyzer 5000 was functioning properly when he performed the test in question. Id. at 308 (3).