Prior to his DUI arrest, appellant consented to a PAS breath test which tested his blood alcohol level at 0.09 percent. Following his arrest, he was required to submit to a blood test, which measured his blood alcohol at 0.12. On appeal, he contended that his Fourth Amendment rights were violated by the taking of his blood after he voluntarily submitted to the PAS test. (Arguing that the recent decision in People v. Williams (2002) 28 Cal. 4th 408, which clarified under what conditions the PAS test is admissible, eliminated any justification for the nonconsensual taking of a blood sample following the administration of a PAS test.) The appellate court affirmed. Nothing in Williams compels the conclusion that the PAS test is the functional equivalent of the mandatory BAL test. Despite the taking of the PAS test, it remains important to obtain the more reliable results of the chemical test before the evidence becomes unavailable with the passage of time.