Alcotest indicated not of sufficient length
Apparently, the defendant did not follow the officer’s instructions because the Alcott indicated not of sufficient length and/or volume to generate a valid reading on the testing apparatus. The officer again instructed defendant and advised him that if he did not give a long continuous breath [, it] would be considered a refusal. When defendant again failed to do that, he was charged with refusal to give a breath sample, in violation of N.J.S.A. 39:4-50.2. The Court held, Because defendant unequivocally consented to the breath test, his later failures to provide the necessary volume and length of breath samples did not render his earlier consent ambiguous or conditional. Thus, defendant remained among those who have consented and, hence, was not entitled to reading of the Additional Statement. As such, the New Jersey Motorist/Defendant was found guilty of refusing to provide breath test.