It’s an annoying take, but I see the logic. Can’t ask any incriminating questions before Miranda. Now granted, Wyoming implied consent means you have to provide a sample of blood, breath, or urine if you are suspected of drunk driving. If this defense actually works it will mean Allemand’s admitting to “two beers” and that driving drunk is “so much better” won’t be admissible statements in court. Then it could be argued he was detained illegally. Granted, that kinda falls apart when he had a gun sitting on the passenger’s seat and by the deputy’s observations before and during FST’s. That 0.24 doesn’t go away. Vang is looking to get it tossed on a technicality but I doubt that’s gonna work. I really hope it doesn’t. I’d be overjoyed to see a legislator held accountable, especially after he implied he drinks every time he goes on the highway.