Following a DUI arrest, appellant’s blood was drawn by a phlebotomist who did not meet the requirements of Vehicle Code section 23158. The appellate division of the Superior Court affirmed his conviction, and certified the following questions for determination by the appellate court: 1.) whether the trial court erred in denying appellant’s suppression motion because of the qualifications of the phlebotomist, and 2.) whether it violated appellant’s Fourteenth Amendment right to a fair trial for the prosecution to use evidence obtained in violation of the statutory scheme to prove an element of the offense. The appellate court also requested briefing on the issue of whether San Diego County law enforcement has a deliberate, systematic, and persistent policy to have blood drawn in violation of the statutory scheme. The appellate court here held that the record did not establish a persistent policy to violate the statute, and that neither appellant’s Fourth nor Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated by the introduction of the blood test results. (The court also noted that since neither constitutional issue was raised below, both issues were waived.)