Cases from cite.case.law:

IN RE STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES- REPORT, 262 So. 3d 59 (Fla. 2019)

. . . . § 316.1934(1), Fla. Stat. . . . Give if appropriate. § 316.1934(2)(a) and (2)(b), Fla. Stat. 1. . . . Give if appropriate. § 316.1934(2)(a) and (2)(b), Fla. Stat. 1. . . . Give if appropriate. § 316.1934(2)(a) and (2)(b), Fla. Stat. 1. . . . Give if appropriate. § 316.1934(2)(a) and (2)(b), Fla. Stat. 1. . . .

GOODMAN, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT,, 238 So. 3d 102 (Fla. 2018)

. . . See §§ 316.1932, 316.1933, 316.1934, Fla. Stat. (2009). . . . See id. § 316.1934(2)(c) (making a BAC of 0.08 or higher prima facie evidence of impairment). . . . evidence bearing upon the question of whether [they were] under the influence of alcoholic beverages." § 316.1934 . . . Finally, defendants are free to challenge the accuracy of their result in any given case. § 316.1934( . . .

CITY OF TAVARES v. HARPER,, 230 So. 3d 918 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . .” § 316.1934(2)(c), Fla. Stat. . . . than 0.05 creates a presumption that the driver was “not under the influence of alcoholic beverages 316.1934 . . .

G. FRAME, v. HARTFORD LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY,, 257 F. Supp. 3d 1268 (M.D. Fla. 2017)

. . . . § 316.1934(2)(c). . . .

IN RE STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES- REPORT NO., 211 So. 3d 995 (Fla. 2017)

. . . give one or more of the following instructions on the presumptions of impairment established by §§ 316.1934 . . . Stat.Give if appropriate. § 316.1934(2)(a) and (2)(b), Fla. Stat. 1. . . .

A. MONTES- VALETON, v. STATE, 216 So. 3d 475 (Fla. 2017)

. . . The implied consent law consists of sections 316.1932, 316.1933, and 316.1934, Florida Statutes (2008 . . .

In STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES- REPORT NO., 192 So. 3d 1190 (Fla. 2016)

. . . . § 316.1934(1), Fla. Stat. . . . -4he following- instmeUom on the -presumptions of impairment established-by Give if appropriate., § 316.1934 . . . It is not necessary to instruct'on the “prima facie evidence of impairment” in § 316.1934(2)(c), Fla. . . . transported or drawn upon a highway, except devices used exclusively upon stationary rails or tracks. § 316.1934 . . . follming---msint£tions--~GM~the ■ presumptions of-impai/mnent established by■ Give if appropriate. § 316.1934 . . .

STATE v. F. LILES, v., 191 So. 3d 484 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . Finally, section 316.1934, Florida Statutes (2011), sets forth 'various legal presumptions' associated . . .

HALL, v. WEST s a s LLC, a s a, 157 So. 3d 329 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . See § 316.1934(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (2008). . . .

DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, v. WIGGEN,, 152 So. 3d 773 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . .” § 316.1934(5), Fla. . . . .; see also § 316.1934(2)(c) (providing that a test result of 0.08 or higher is “prima facie evidence . . .

BENJAMIN, v. TANDEM HEALTHCARE, INC. a d b a a, 93 So. 3d 1076 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . The criminal case exclusion shall not apply to an affidavit otherwise admissible under s. 316.1934 or . . .

W. LINK, v. S. TUCKER,, 870 F. Supp. 2d 1309 (N.D. Fla. 2012)

. . . the DUI jury instructions the presumption of impairment instruction set forth in Florida Statutes § 316.1934 . . . compliance with the mandates of § 316.1933, the State may not avail itself of the presumptions of § 316.1934 . . .

A. FESTA, v. SANTA ROSA COUNTY FLORIDA,, 413 F. App'x 182 (11th Cir. 2011)

. . . Florida Statute § 316.1934 provides that if a person registers, “at th[e] time” of a breathylzer test . . . Stat. § 316.1934(2)(a). . . . Florida Statute § 316.1934 further provides that “[t]he presumptions provided in this subsection do not . . . Id. § 316.1934(2). . . .

DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, v. BERNE,, 49 So. 3d 779 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . These documents contained all of the statutorily required information necessary under section 316.1934 . . . Stat. (2005); see also § 316.1934(2)(c), Fla. . . .

KURECKA, v. STATE v. J., 67 So. 3d 1052 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . See §§ 316.1932, 316.1933, and 316.1934, Fla. Stat.; State v. . . .

BYRD, v. BT FOODS, INC. d b a s a, 26 So. 3d 600 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . The criminal case exclusion shall not apply to an affidavit otherwise admissible under s. 316.1934 or . . .

IN RE STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES- REPORT NO., 18 So. 3d 523 (Fla. 2009)

. . . , proposed instruction 28.1(a) did not include the presumption of impairment established by section 316.1934 . . . Accordingly, we correct the Committee’s inadvertent exclusion of the presumption of impairment under section 316.1934 . . .

YANKEY, v. DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES,, 6 So. 3d 633 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . Notably, section 316.1934(5) provides that an affidavit containing breath test results “is admissible . . . recent required maintenance” if the test was administered by means of a breath testing instrument. § 316.1934 . . .

STATE v. BASTOS, 985 So. 2d 37 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . See §§ 316.1932(1) & 316.1934(2), Fla. Stat. (2005); see also State v. . . . See §§ 316.193(l)(c) & 316.1934(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (2005). . . . See § 316.1934(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2005). . . .

DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, v. FALCONE,, 983 So. 2d 755 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . Section 316.1934(5), Florida Statutes (2006), provides as follows: An affidavit containing the results . . . However, section 316.1934(5) requires that the affidavit meet the requirements of subsections (a) through . . . See Alliston, 813 So.2d at 144 (noting that section 316.1934(5) provides that the affidavit is admissible . . . Therefore, it was the Department’s burden to prove that the requirements of section 316.1934(5) were . . . Buttolph, 969 So.2d 1209, 1211 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (“Returning to section 316.1934(5), Florida Statutes . . .

STATE v. BELVIN,, 986 So. 2d 516 (Fla. 2008)

. . . Sections 316.1934(5) and 90.803(8), Florida Statutes (2007), provide for the introduction of affidavits . . . results of an authorized test to determine alcohol content of the blood or breath of a defendant. § 316.1934 . . . The criminal case exclusion shall not apply to an affidavit otherwise admissible under s. 316.1934 or . . . See § 316.1934(5), Fla. Stat. (2007). . . . Furthermore, even though section 316.1934(5) gives a defendant the right to subpoena the breath test . . . Section 316.1934(5), Florida Statutes (2007), provides that the “[ajdmissibility of the affidavit does . . . Donaldson, 579 So.2d 728 (Fla.1991), has been superseded by section 316.1934(5), Florida Statutes (effective . . .

ABRAHAM YISRAEL, v. STATE OF FLORIDA,, 986 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 2008)

. . . The criminal case exclusion shall not apply to an affidavit otherwise admissible under s. 316.1934 or . . .

YISRAEL, v. STATE, 993 So. 2d 952 (Fla. 2008)

. . . The criminal case exclusion shall not apply to an affidavit otherwise admissible under s. 316.1934 or . . .

VENTURA, v. STATE, 973 So. 2d 634 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . The criminal case exclusion shall not apply to an affidavit otherwise admissible under s. 316.1934 or . . .

STATE v. BUTTOLPH,, 969 So. 2d 1209 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . . § 316.1934(5) provides: (5) An affidavit containing the results of any test of a person’s blood or . . . Returning to section 316.1934(5), Florida Statutes, which specifies the “most recent required maintenance . . .

STATE v. R. CLEMENTS,, 968 So. 2d 59 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . See also § 316.1934(2), Fla. Stat. (2006). . . .

BRUCH, v. STATE, 954 So. 2d 1242 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . . § 316.1934(2)(c), Fla. . . .

STATE v. CUBIC,, 946 So. 2d 606 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . See § 316.1934(2)(c), Fla. . . .

In STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES- No., 946 So. 2d 1061 (Fla. 2006)

. . . cases, an instruction may be given on one or more of the presumptions of impairment established by §- § 316.1934 . . .

DELGADO, v. STATE, 948 So. 2d 681 (Fla. 2006)

. . . providing testing methods for alcohol blood level, including breathalyzers, and implied consent rule); § 316.1934 . . .

BELVIN, v. STATE, 922 So. 2d 1046 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . See §§ 316.1934(5); 90.803(8), Fla. Stat. . . . Section 316.1934(5) provides: An affidavit containing the results of any test of a person’s blood or . . . The criminal case exclusion shall not apply to an affidavit otherwise admissible under s. 316.1934- or . . . The state maintains that, because sections 316.1934(5) and 90.803(8) expressly state that breath test . . . State, 650 So.2d 1021 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), we held that section 316.1934(5), Florida Statutes (1991), . . . In addition, section 316.1934(5), Florida Statutes (2004), provides that “Admissibility of the affidavit . . .

LEVERITT, v. STATE, 924 So. 2d 42 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . the trial court instructed the jury to make certain presumptions of impairment pursuant to section 316.1934 . . . reversibly erred in instructing the jury to make the statutory presumptions of impairment, see section 316.1934 . . .

JENKINS, v. STATE, 924 So. 2d 20 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . Section 316.1934(3), Florida Statutes (2005), provides that in order for the chemical analysis of a DUI . . . In addition, section 316.1934(2) provides that “the results of any test administered in accordance with . . .

GURRY, v. DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY,, 902 So. 2d 881 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . Section 316.1934(5), Florida , Statutes, provides: (5) An affidavit containing the results of any test . . .

SHIVER, v. STATE, 900 So. 2d 615 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . The State, over objection and relying on section 316.1934(5), Florida Statutes (2002), offered into evidence . . . Critical here, the affidavit was also relied upon by the State, pursuant to section 316.1934(5)(e), Florida . . .

STATE v. BODDEN,, 877 So. 2d 680 (Fla. 2004)

. . . Finally, sections 316.1933(2)(b) and 316.1934(3) both provide that chemical analysis of a person’s blood . . . level of' alcohol in his or her system, the State bénéfíts from the presumption of impairment. ' See § 316.1934 . . . Section 316.1934 addresses testing methods that must be employed in order for the State to benefit from . . .

STATE v. MONTELLO P., 867 So. 2d 613 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . (emphasis added); § 316.1934(3), Fla. . . . See § 316.1934(2). . . .

SCHOFIELD, v. STATE, 867 So. 2d 446 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . Section 316.1934(5), Florida Statutes (2000), provides that an affidavit is “admissible without further . . . proof of the results” gives rise to the rebuttable presumption of impairment as set forth in section 316.1934 . . . Schofield does not contest that the affidavit contains all of the requisite information required in section 316.1934 . . . Section 316.1934(5), Florida Statutes (2000), allows the admission of breath test results by affidavit . . .

JENKINS, v. STATE v., 855 So. 2d 1219 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . .20 to mimic acceptable or unacceptable levels of alcohol as set forth in sections 316.193 through 316.1934 . . . The overwhelming majority of these cases challenge the presumption of intoxication under section 316.1934 . . . presumption of impairment where there is violation of the implied consent law found in sections 816.1932-316.1934 . . . State, 604 So.2d 783 (Fla.1992), that when there is no assurance of compliance with sections 316.1932-316.1934 . . .

STATE v. CAMERON,, 837 So. 2d 1111 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . compliance with the three-prong common law test, the “presumption of impairment created by [section 316.1934 . . .

STATE v. SCHREIBER,, 835 So. 2d 344 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . THEORY, HAVE THE EFFECT OF GIVING AN INSTRUCTION ON THE STATUTORY PRESUMPTIONS OF IMPAIRMENT IN SECTION 316.1934 . . . blood; however, he did not read her her rights under the Implied Consent Law, §§ 316.1932, 316.1933, 316.1934 . . . However, the presumption of impairment created by s. 316.1934(2) is a moot concern if the State proves . . . redundancy issue, in Miles II, our Supreme Court held the statutory presumption provided for in s. 316.1934 . . . Section 316.1934(2), Florida Statutes (2001), in pertinent part, provides: At the trial of any civil . . .

RODRIGUEZ, v. STATE, 837 So. 2d 478 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . committed fundamental error by instructing the jury as to the statutory presumptions under section 316.1934 . . .

BURGESS, v. STATE, 831 So. 2d 137 (Fla. 2002)

. . . The criminal case exclusion shall not apply to an affidavit otherwise admissible under s. 316.1934 or . . .

LEVERITT, v. STATE, 817 So. 2d 891 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . the trial court instructed the jury to make certain presumptions of impairment pursuant to section 316.1934 . . . validity of the blood test, the central issue at trial, and the jury instruction made pursuant to section 316.1934 . . . reversibly erred in instructing the jury to make the statutory presumptions of impairment, see section 316.1934 . . . rule and that, as a result, the state was not entitled to a presumption of impairment under section 316.1934 . . .

BONINE, v. STATE, 811 So. 2d 863 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . State, 805 So.2d 990 (Fla. 4th DCA, 2001): Thus, "the presumption of impairment created by [section 316.1934 . . . The jury was also instructed as to the statutory presumption of impairment in section 316.1934. . . .

STATE v. LANGSFORD,, 816 So. 2d 136 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . is the established law of this state that Florida’s implied consent statutes [§§ 316.1932, 316.1933, 316.1934 . . . "F.S. 316.1932, F.S. 316.1933, F.S. 316.1934, (2000).” . . .

DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, v. R. ALLISTON,, 813 So. 2d 141 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . Section 316.1934(5), Florida Statutes (2000), provides that an affidavit containing the results of any . . .

WILSON, v. STATE, 812 So. 2d 452 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . jury was improperly instructed regarding the statutory presumptions of impairment pursuant to section 316.1934 . . .

DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, v. SILVA,, 806 So. 2d 551 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . are not confidential and shall be admissible into evidence in accordance with the provisions of s. 316.1934 . . .

DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, v. JEFFREY NEFF, 804 So. 2d 519 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . the date of the performance of the most recent required maintenance’ as required by Florida Statute § 316.1934 . . .

V. BASS, v. STATE, 801 So. 2d 975 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . See §§ 316.1932-316.1934. . . . . § 316.1934(3). In State v. . . . the blood that the state could not use the statutory presumptions of impairment set forth in section 316.1934 . . .

S. DODGE, v. STATE, 805 So. 2d 990 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . See § 316.1934(2)(a),(c), Fla. Stat. (2000). . . . See § 316.1934(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2000). . . . Thus, “the presumption of impairment created by [section 316.1934(2), Florida Statutes] is a moot concern . . .

SERVIS, v. STATE, 802 So. 2d 359 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . given to the jury over his objection regarding statutory presumptions of impairment pursuant to section 316.1934 . . . Stat. §§ 316.1932-316.1934 (1999). . . .

DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, v. K. DEHART,, 799 So. 2d 1079 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . license, ruling that the breath test result affidavit submitted by DHSMV failed to comply with section 316.1934 . . . Section 316.1934(5) of the Florida Statutes (1999), provides in relevant part: Presumption of impairment . . . Fourth District held that a breath test result affidavit prepared for use in accordance with section 316.1934 . . . which is the standard form used in preparing a breath test result affidavit, complied with section 316.1934 . . .

TYNER, v. STATE, 805 So. 2d 862 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . blood alcohol level and the improper application of the presumption of impairment created by section 316.1934 . . . State concedes that it was not entitled to the use of the presumption of impairment created by section 316.1934 . . . obtained in accordance with the core policies of the implied consent law, sections 316.1932, 316.1933 and 316.1934 . . . The jury was not instructed regarding the presumption of impairment created by section 316.1934, nor . . . Section 316.1934(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2000), provides: If there was at that time a blood-alcohol . . .

DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, v. A. COCHRAN,, 798 So. 2d 761 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . was the only evidence in that case of the driver’s blood alcohol level, failed to comply with section 316.1934 . . . submitted by the police officer, finding it fatally defective because it did not comply with section 316.1934 . . . that the inspection included maintenance should have sufficed, even if the requirements of section 316.1934 . . .

DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, v. RUSSELL,, 793 So. 2d 1073 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . approved by FDLE and (2) the breath test result affidavit admitted into evidence, pursuant to section 316.1934 . . . breath test result affidavit admitted into evidence failed to comply with the requirements of section 316.1934 . . . Section 316.1934(5), Florida Statutes, provides: An affidavit containing the results of any test of a . . .

HEMBREE, v. STATE, 790 So. 2d 590 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . objection, the trial court instructed the jury on the statutory presumptions of impairment in section 316.1934 . . . See §§ 316.1932-316.1934, Fla. Stat. . . .

G. RAFFERTY, v. STATE, 799 So. 2d 243 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . The implied consent law is embodied in sections 316.1932 to 316.1934, Florida Statutes (1997), and provides . . . Section 316.1934, Florida Statutes (1997), contains express presumptions of impairment and an implied . . . Section 316.1934(2), Florida Statutes (1997), provides for the following presumptions regarding impairment . . .

DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, v. L. MOWRY,, 794 So. 2d 657 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . departed' from the essential requirements of law when it ruled, contrary to the provisions of section 316.1934 . . . The breath test affidavit is admissible pursuant to section 316.1934(5) which provides as follows: An . . . testing instrument, the date of performance of the most recent required maintenance on such instrument. § 316.1934 . . .

RICHARDSON, v. STATE, 797 So. 2d 10 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . The jury was not instructed regarding the presumption that may attach pursuant to section 316.1934(2) . . .

STATE v. MILES,, 775 So. 2d 950 (Fla. 2000)

. . . , the State would not be entitled to the presumption of impairment provided for pursuant to section 316.1934 . . . See §§ 316.1932, 316.1933, 316.1934, Fla. Stat. (1995). . . . See § 316.1934(2), Fla. Stat. (1995). . . .

STATE v. KLIPHOUSE,, 771 So. 2d 16 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . The Implied Consent Laws (sections 316.1932 through 316.1934) provide procedures for gathering and testing . . . See also § 316.1934(2)(c) ("[A] person who has a blood-alcohol level or breath-alcohol level of 0.08 . . .

IBRAIMOV, v. STATE, 760 So. 2d 291 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . Therefore, the jury was properly instructed on the presumptions of impairment set forth in section 316.1934 . . .

STATE v. SANDT,, 751 So. 2d 136 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . State would not be allowed to rely upon the statutory presumption of impairment provided by section 316.1934 . . .

LANOUE, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT,, 751 So. 2d 94 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . Further, section 316.1934(2) provides that test results are “admissible into evidence when otherwise . . . physical control of, a motor vehicle, with an unlawful blood-alcohol level or breath-alcohol level.” § 316.1934 . . . the influence of alcoholic beverages to the extent that his or her normal faculties were impaired.” § 316.1934 . . .

SEARLES, v. STATE, 750 So. 2d 667 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . entitled to the jury instructions regarding the statutory presumptions of impairment found in section 316.1934 . . .

STATE v. A. TOWNSEND,, 746 So. 2d 495 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . not be entitled to have the jury instructed on the presumptions of impairment set forth in section 316.1934 . . .

STATE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, v. A. ANTHOL,, 742 So. 2d 813 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . We contrast these provisions with section 316.1934(5), which requires an “affidavit containing the results . . .

J. ACKERMAN, v. STATE, 737 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . See § 316.1934(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (1997); State v. Rolle, 560 So.2d 1154, 1156-57 (Fla.1990). . . .

LAMONTAGUE, v. STATE, 728 So. 2d 1181 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . State, 597 So.2d 770, 774 (Fla.1992): In a case involving DUI by impairment, section 316.1934, Fla. . . .

STATE v. MILES,, 732 So. 2d 350 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . which the trial court ruled that the state will not be entitled to a presumption pursuant to section 316.1934 . . . “The implied consent law.consists of sections 316.1932, 316.1933, and 316.1934, Florida Statutes, which . . . Based on this finding, the trial court ruled the state was not entitled to a presumption under section 316.1934 . . . concluded, therefore, that the state would not be entitled to any of the presumptions contained in section 316.1934 . . . April 1, 1994, the State shall not be allowed the benefit of the presumptions established in section 316.1934 . . . There are two presumptions contained in section 316.1934, Florida Statutes. . . .

STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES, 723 So. 2d 123 (Fla. 1998)

. . . cases, an instruction may be given on one or more of the presumptions of impairment established by F.S. 316.1934 . . . cases, an instruction may be given on one or more of the presumptions of impairment established by F.S. 316.1934 . . .

EUCEDA, v. STATE, 711 So. 2d 122 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . .” § 316.1934(1), Fla. Stat. (1993). . . .

FAIRES, v. STATE, 711 So. 2d 597 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . analysis of blood, breath, or urine, are inadmissible to trigger the presumption provided by Section 316.1934 . . .

WILLIAMS, v. STATE, 710 So. 2d 24 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . . § 316.1934(1). . . . greater, see id. § 316.193(l)(b), nor may it be used to trigger any impairment presumptions under section 316.1934 . . . Under section 316.1934(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1993), a 0.07% reading does not give rise to any presumption . . . Section 316.1934(2), Florida Statutes (1993), specifically provides that impairment is presumed where . . . analysis of blood, breath, or urine, are inadmissible to trigger the presumption provided by Section 316.1934 . . . Section 316.1934 provides in relevant part: (1) It is unlawful and punishable as provided in chapter . . .

STATE v. SCLAFANI,, 704 So. 2d 128 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . . § 316.1934(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (1995). See also Robertson v. State, 604 So.2d 783 (Fla.1992). . . .

STATE v. IRIZARRY,, 698 So. 2d 912 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . motion in limine to introduce into evidence a breath test result affidavit prepared pursuant to section 316.1934 . . . public importance: IS A BREATH TEST RESULT AFFIDAVIT PREPARED FOR USE IN ACCORDANCE WITH FLORIDA STATUTE 316.1934 . . . breathalyzer test machine has been calibrated, tested and inspected, the legislature amended section 316.1934 . . . In implementing section 316.1934(5), the Department of Law Enforcement has promulgated FDLE/ICP Form . . .

LEE, v. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES,, 698 So. 2d 1194 (Fla. 1997)

. . . The criminal case exclusion shall not apply to an affidavit otherwise admissible under s. 316.1934(5) . . .

STATE v. G. ST. PIERRE,, 693 So. 2d 102 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . In this regard, section 316.1934(2) of the Florida Statutes (1993) provides that the results of any blood . . . See § 316.1934, Fla.Stat. (1993). See also Ridgeway v. State, 514 So.2d 418 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). . . .

STATE v. JOHNSON, Jr., 695 So. 2d 771 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . Section 316.1934(2) provides that the results of blood tests performed pursuant to section 316.1933 are . . . are not confidential and shall be admissible into evidence in accordance with the provisions of s. 316.1934 . . .

STATE v. TALTY, 692 So. 2d 936 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . . § 316.1934(2), Fla. Stat. (1993). . . . Section 316.1934(2), Florida Statutes (1993), provides: Upon the trial of any civil or criminal action_the . . . While section 316.1934 was enacted earlier, it was modified in the same law, and several other modifications . . . Legislature has not seen fit to include section 316.193(9) in the admissible tests listed in section 316.1934 . . .

E. MARTINEZ, v. STATE, 692 So. 2d 199 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . See § 316.1934(2), Fla.Stat. (1993). . . . See id. § 316.1934(2)(a). . . .

DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY MOTOR VEHICLES, v. JOHNSON,, 686 So. 2d 672 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . Under section 316.1934(2)(c), Florida Statutes (1995), a test result of “0.08 percent or more” is “prima . . . differences or variations from approved techniques, the test results would not be invalid under section 316.1934 . . .

STATE v. A. FRIEDRICH,, 681 So. 2d 1157 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . . § 316.1934(3), Fla.Stat. (1993); Ridgeway v. State, 514 So.2d 418 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). . . . trier of fact if the breath test result is so close to one of presumptive levels established by section 316.1934 . . . should not be subjected to the application of the statutory presumption of being impaired set by section 316.1934 . . .

STATE v. MARSHALL,, 695 So. 2d 719 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . are not confidential and shall be admissible into evidence in accordance with the provisions of s. 316.1934 . . .

STATE v. RIVAS- MARMOL,, 679 So. 2d 808 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . the established law of this state that Florida’s implied consent statutes [Secs. 316.1932, 316.1933, 316.1934 . . .

STATE v. MEADOR, Jr., 674 So. 2d 826 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . .” § 316.1934(1), Fla. Stat. (1991). . . .

STATE v. A. TAGNER,, 673 So. 2d 57 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . See § 316.1934(2)(c), Fla.Stat. (1993); State v. . . .

MARCOLINI, v. STATE ACOSTA, v. STATE, 673 So. 2d 3 (Fla. 1996)

. . . State, 530 So.2d 986 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988), which both held section 316.1934(2)(c) and its corresponding . . .

STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES, 665 So. 2d 212 (Fla. 1995)

. . . cases, an instruction may be given on one or more of the presumptions of impairment established by F.S. 316.1934 . . .

In DALE, CONTRERAS, a v. DALE,, 199 B.R. 1014 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 1995)

. . . The applicable law of Florida regarding the presumption of driving while intoxicated is found in § 316.1934 . . . was affected by his drinking to such an extent that his normal faculties were impaired pursuant to § 316.1934 . . .

PINELLAS COUNTY, By BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, v. BETTIS, Sr. Jr. Sr. P., 659 So. 2d 1365 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . See § 316.1934(2)(c), Fla.Stat. (1989). . . .

STATE v. SLANEY,, 653 So. 2d 422 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . is the established law of this state that Florida’s implied consent statutes [§§ 316.1932, 316.1933, 316.1934 . . . by an individual possessing a valid permit issued by the department for this purpose,” but Section 316.1934 . . . The current version of the statute, § 316.1934(3), Fla.Stat. (1993), additionally provides that the test . . .

McADAM, v. STATE, 648 So. 2d 1244 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . . § 316.1934(2)(a), Fla.Stat. (1991); Colo.Rev. Stat. § 42-4-1202(2)(a). . . .

GEHRMANN, v. STATE, 650 So. 2d 1021 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . The circuit court held that section 316.1934(5), Florida Statutes (1991) does not violate the confrontation . . .

A. MICHIE, v. STATE, 632 So. 2d 1106 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . Section 316.1934, Florida Statutes (1991), provides that 0.10 percent or more by weight of alcohol in . . .

DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, v. FARLEY,, 633 So. 2d 69 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . to carry its burden that there was substantial compliance with the rule, as permitted under section 316.1934 . . .

MEHL, v. STATE, 632 So. 2d 593 (Fla. 1993)

. . . two questions of great public importance: Can the State introduce into evidence pursuant to section 316.1934 . . . Can the State introduce into evidence pursuant to section 316.1934 blood sample test results conducted . . . taken pursuant to section 316.-1933; and that the presumption of admissibility established in section 316.1934 . . . April 1, 1994, the State shall not be allowed the benefit of the presumptions established in section 316.1934 . . .

STATE v. HILL,, 618 So. 2d 742 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . state upon remand shall have the opportunity to demonstrate, by affidavit or otherwise, see section 316.1934 . . .