In a ruling late last week, the California Supreme Court found that California drunk-driving defendants are now entitled to challenge blood-alcohol findings based on the inaccuracy of breathalyzer results. This ruling effectively weakens many prosecutorial cases by allowing the DUI defense to "rebut the presumption that he was under the influence".
Following recent rulings in other states, the California Supreme Court found the formula for converting breath to blood-alcohol levels to be inaccurate in many cases. Factors including medical condition, gender, temperature, the condition of the device itself, even atmospheric conditions may all be taken into account when defending against a drunk-driving charge.
Under current California law, a suspected drunk-driver is required to submit either a blood test, which measures the amount of alcohol in the blood, or a breathalyzer test (refusal can result in automatic suspension of driving privileges). Alcohol levels in a breath sample are converted mathematically to determine BAC. In California, a person is legally too drunk to drive when his/her blood-alcohol level is 0.08% or higher.
"The question is whether a defendant who has a blood-alcohol concentration of 0.08% or more measured by breath is entitled to rebut that presumption that he was under the influence" Justice Carol A. Corrigan wrote. The court's answer to that question was an overwhelming "Yes".
"Evidence casting doubt on the accuracy of the breath-to-blood conversion ratio is just as relevant as other evidence rebutting the presumption of intoxication from a breath test result, such as evidence that the defendant had a high tolerance for alcohol or performed well in field sobriety testing," Corrigan also wrote.
To determine whether this new ruling could impact the outcome of your drunk-driving case, consult an experienced DUI attorney.
Source
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment