Lee Roy Keith appeals his convictions of driving under the influence of alcohol and following too close. Held:
1. Keith's initial contention is that the trial court erred in admitting evidence that he refused to submit to a blood-alcohol test. "[T]he admission into evidence of a defendant's refusal to submit. to [a blood-alcohol test] does not offend the right against self-incrimination." South Dakota v. Neville, 459 U. S. 553, 554 (103 SC 916, 74 LE2d 748) (1983). Where a defendant has been properly informed of his rights, his refusal to submit to the test is not the product of coercion; and such evidence is both relevant and admissible. Accord Wessels v. State, 169 Ga. App. 246 (312 SE2d 361) (1983)
Ken Stula, Solicitor, for appellee.