☢ test - Í

that [Officer Bruhl] informed Ritter that the test would have to be done that night; that he offered to take Ritter to a closer facility in a neighboring county; and that he offered Ritter a phone book to find a facility. Bruhl further testified that Ritter insisted on going to his personal physician but never provided him with a name or number to contact him.” “In the instant case, the trial court found that complying with Ritter's request to drive to Alpharetta would have taken the officer out of his jurisdiction, as Alpharetta was 30 to 45 minutes away; that Bruhl's police department was short of staff on the evening in question, and that there were facilities in neighboring jurisdictions, which Bruhl offered to Ritter as an alternative. Additionally, there was no evidence presented that Ritter had made arrangements to be tested at his personal physician's office. [Cit.] As we are bound to view the evidence most favorably to uphold the trial court's findings and judgment, [cit.] and the evidence here supports the trial court's ruling that Ritter's request was reasonably accommodated, [cit.] this enumerated error fails.” State v. Metzager, 303 Ga.App. 17, 692 S.E.2d 687 (March 22, 2010). Trial court properly granted motion to suppress implied consent results where officer responded to defendant’s request for independent test by taking him to local hospital without giving him opportunity to choose another facility. “‘[T]he “qualified personnel of his own choosing” language in OCGA § 40-6-392(a)(3) is not superfluous, and the fact that the accused was given an additional test at a facility other than the one he selected does not demonstrate the state's compliance with the statute.’ (Citation omitted; emphasis in original.) Joel v. State, 245 Ga.App. 750, 753, 538 S.E.2d 847 (2000).” Fowler v. State, 294 Ga.App. 864, 670 S.E.2d 448 (November 4, 2008). Officer did not fail to make reasonable accommodation. Defendant’s request was properly ruled not a request for an independent test, but rather a request to take a breath test instead of officer’s requested blood test; but [e]ven if Fowler was asking for an independent test, however, the officer testified that he believed that there was ‘no way’ Fowler would have been able to successfully complete a breath test due to the severity of the injuries to his mouth and jaw. Further, Fowler was not in the custody of the officer, but was a patient of the hospital waiting for x-rays and treatment for a fractured jaw. As the trial court noted, it was reasonable in this situation for the officer to leave Fowler in the custody of the hospital as opposed to taking custody of him and transporting him, with an untreated broken jaw, to another location for a breath test, thereby disrupting his medical treatment and risking further injury.” State v. Howard, 283 Ga.App. 234, 641 S.E.2d 225 (January 8, 2007). Evidence supported trial court’s determination that officer did not provide reasonable accommodation to defendant’s request for independent test. “Howard testified that, during the discussion that followed this request, he was told by another police officer in Dunn’s presence that an independent blood test would cost about $400 to $500 and that this cost must be paid that night. Although Dunn could not recall what cost the other officer quoted to Howard, Dunn testified that it was ‘nothing that dramatic.’ Howard testified that he had only $80 in his possession at the time. He asked if his father could meet him at the hospital to pay for the blood test; Dunn said no, citing security risks. Howard asked if his father could pay the hospital by credit card before Howard went to the hospital for the test; again Dunn said no, citing security risks. Howard asked if he could take the blood test and have his father come to the hospital afterwards and pay by credit card; once again, Dunn said no, citing security risks. Howard testified that he was not permitted to use his cell phone to call for financial assistance; Dunn, on the other hand, testified that Howard was allowed to make two phone calls. Dunn did offer to take Howard to an ATM machine, but Howard did not have sufficient funds there to cover what he had been told was the cost of the test, and Dunn refused to allow him to obtain funds in any other way. The end result was that Dunn never took Howard to the hospital for the independent blood test he had requested. Howard, unable to obtain an independent test, finally agreed to take a second breath test on the other available state machine.” “Howard was not allowed even to attempt to obtain the needed funds, nor did Dunn provide any assistance other than offering to go by an ATM machine. [Cit.] As the trial court pointed out, where security is of concern, relatives could have been asked to come to a secure location, such as the jail, in order to provide Howard with the necessary funds. No evidence indicated that such arrangements would have caused extended delays, nor that the police officer lacked time or resources to make such an accommodation. Vague security concerns, unsupported by any specific evidence, do not provide sufficient grounds to deny an accused’s request for an independent test by personnel of his own choosing. [Cit.] ‘While it is not the officer’s duty to insure the performance of an independent test, he cannot prevent a defendant from exercising his right to such a test,’” quoting State v. Buffington, 189 Ga.App. 800, 801, 377 S.E.2d 548 (1989). “According to the testimony relied upon by the trial court, the officer here rebuffed every suggestion made by Howard. Dunn’s response was not a ‘reasonable effort to accommodate’ Howard’s request for an independent blood test and had the effect of denying Howard his right to such a test under OCGA § 40-6- 92(a)(3).” Whittle v. State, 282 Ga.App. 64, 637 S.E.2d 800 (October 24, 2006). No violation of defendant’s right to independent