With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". tests, and (3) the aggravated portion of the DWI charge should be dismissed because the breathalyzer test was taken more than an hour and a half after Defendant was driving and registered .16, the exact reading required to raise DWI to the aggravated level. The State concedes that, under the circumstances of this case, in which the officer testified that there was no way of knowing what Defendant’s blood alcohol content was at the time of driving, a rational juror could not find beyond a reasonable doubt the facts necessary to raise the DWI to an aggravated level. We agree and therefore reverse and remand for entry of judgment for simple DWI unless one of Defendant’s other issues results in reversal. See State v. Cavanaugh, 116 N.M. 826, 829-30, 867 P.2d 1208, 1211-12 (Ct.App.1993) (<HOLDING>). We hold that Defendant’s other issues do not

A: holding that in order to convict a defendant of dui under subsection 3802b the commonwealth cannot rely on the blood serum analysis alone it must introduce evidence of alcohol by weight in terms of whole blood
B: holding that the fourth amendment is implicated by the withdrawal of blood to test its alcohol content
C: holding a warrantless blood test reasonable due to bloods rapid loss of its alcohol content
D: holding that blood alcohol content almost 30 over the limit together with testimony of intoxication at the time of driving was sufficient to convict contrasting a case in which the blood alcohol content was just barely over the limit which was insufficient to convict
D.