a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2019 Dayton DUI.
All Rights Reserved.

9:00 - 17:00

Our Opening Hours Mon. - Fri.

Facebook

Twitter

Search
OVI Menu
 

Intoxilyzer 8000 Tag

Dayton DUI Attorney Charles Rowland > Posts tagged "Intoxilyzer 8000" (Page 4)

Intoxilyzer 8000 Finding Opposition Throughout Ohio and Beyond

In an article in the Athens News (click HERE), the newspaper outlines the latest developments in the attacks on the implementation of the Intoxilyzer 8000 breath test machine.  Apparently, the Ohio Department of Health is not providing a rousing defense of the machine.  Quoting from the article, "Toy noted that in both the Athens and Pickaway County cases, ODH official Mary Martin testified on behalf of the agency, but that Dumm's ruling says her testimony given that she has no scientific background isn't sufficient basis to validate the Intoxilyzer's findings as trial evidence." Up till now, prosecutors...

Continue reading

Intoxilyzer 8000 Evidence Thrown Out in Circleville, Ohio

Rollout of breath tester hits legal snag As reported HERE in the Columbus Dispatch, "Judge Gary Dumm of Circleville Municipal Court ruled Thursday that test results from the Intoxilyzer 8000 will not be admitted in his court until the state can present scientific proof that the machine's technology is sound."  This flirts with overturning the 1984 Ohio Supreme Court ruling in State v. Vega that states that breath tests in general cannot be challenged by expert testimony, Dumm said the ruling permitted him to examine whether the Intoxilyzer 8000 was "proper equipment."Columbus lawyer Tim Huey, president-elect and DUI chairman...

Continue reading

I Did Not Refuse!

If you were tested on an Intoxilyzer 5000 breath test machine, the source-code (software inside the machine) may have been rigged against you.  One of the most dramatic happenings in the science of a DUI has been the developments of the source-code battle taking place in Minnesota.  Ohio has recently rejected the Ohio-made BAC DataMaster in favor of the Intoxilyzer breath test machine (often referred to as the Intoxi-LIAR) so we can soon expect similar science-based battles in the Buckey State.Chuck Ramsay, a DWI attorney in Minnesota has been litigating the reliability of the Intoxilyzer 5000 for several years.  Recently...

Continue reading

Fighting for Fairness in DUI Law

As anyone who follows this blog regularly knows, I have a deep and abiding hatred for the 1984 Ohio Supreme Court decision in State vs. Vega (1984), 12 Ohio St.3d 185, 465 N.E.2d 1303.  Vega has come to stand for the proposition that an attorney may challenge the particulars of his client's evidential breath test, but the standards and practices of breath testing as determined by the Ohio Department of Health are sacrosanct and cannot be challenged in court.  In this commentator's opinion, the Vega ruling allows junk science to become conclusive evidence (example: Ohio's adherence to a one-breath-test...

Continue reading

Radio Frequency Interference

Image via WikipediaRadio frequency interference (RFI) or electromagnetic interference can arise when radio signals transmitted in proximity to a breath testing instrument are amplified in a way indistinguishable from electronic signals generated by the instrument during an analysis.  Most instruments are shielded from such interference, have RFI detectors that prevent testing if significant RFI sources are present or both.  Breath testing protocols typically prohibit the use of handheld transmitters in the proximity of the instrument while it is being operated (National Safety Council, 1992).  Subject testing protocols that include the analysis of air blanks, known alcohol samples and agreement...

Continue reading

Rowland Receives Training on the Intoxilyzer 8000

Image via WikipediaWhat You Need to Know about Breath Tests & the Intoxilyzer 8000 Today Charles M. Rowland is attending a seminar involving advanced DUI training on the Intoxilyzer 8000 breath test machine.  Speakers, experts, nationally recognized attorneys and former police officers will give their stories about the shortcomings of the Intoxilyzer 8000 and what is in store when Ohio makes the conversion.  The seminar is sponsored by the Ohio Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and has been approved for credit by the National College for DUI Defense.  This two-day seminar is being held at the Westin Hotel in Columbus,...

Continue reading

Dayton DUI Law: Explaining Error Messages and Their Importance

Ohio utilizes the BAC DataMaster breath test machine to measure the blood alcohol content of a suspect arrested for driving under the influence. The BAC DataMaster is a product of National Patent Analytical Systems, Inc. (NPAS) located in Mansfield, Ohio.  National Patent Analytical Systems has certified Charles Rowland in the operation, diagnostic verification and calibration of the BAC DataMaster Breath Alcohol Testing Instrument, the most commonly used breath testing instrument in Ohio for DUI arrests.  The BAC DataMaster breath test device requires regular maintenance, and a proper environment for testing administration. The BAC DataMaster is part computer, and uses an LED display. If...

Continue reading

O.A.C. 3701-53-02, Approved Evidential Breath Testing Instruments

Image by frippy via FlickrOhio Administrative Code 3701-53-02(A) sets forth the approved instruments for evidential breath testing in Ohio.  It states, (A) The instruments listed in this paragraph are approved as evidential breath testing instruments for use in determining whether a person's breath contains a concentration of alcohol prohibited or defined by sections 4511.19 and/or 1547.11 of the Revised Code, or any other equivalent statute or local ordinance prescribing a defined or prohibited breath-alcohol concentration. The approved evidential breath testing instruments are:BAC DataMaster, BAC DataMaster K, BAC DataMaster cdm; Intoxilyzer model 5000 series 66, 68 and 68 EN; and Intoxilyzer model 8000 (OH-5).O.A.C....

Continue reading

Breath Testing: A Synopsis of the Intoxilyzer 8000

The Intoxilyzer 8000 breath test machine uses the method of INFRARED ABSORPTION to analyze a breath sample.  Unlike the BAC DataMaster, the Intoxilyzer 8000 uses a pulsed Infrared light source.  The wavelength frequency is 3.4 and 9.4 microns for ethanol and other interfering substances.  The decrease in intensity of the infrared light due to absorption by alcohol in the breath sample is proportional to the amount of alcohol in the breath.  The sample chamber holds 29.4 cc's of deep lung air for the Intoxilyzer 8000's analysis.  The information most recently shared by the Ohio Department of Health indicates that the...

Continue reading

Ohio DUI Defense: BAC DataMaster and “Interference”

What Does It Mean When My BAC DataMaster Ticket Shows an Interfering Substance? HOW IT WORKS: The BAC DataMaster is made with two filters which work to assure that only ethanol is present in a test result.  The filters rely on simple chemistry (different absorption curves/different micron levels for interferants) to prevent acetone, methanol, isopropyl or other interfering substances from artificially increasing the result.  When an interferant is present the two filters try to reach the same ethanol result.  To get to the same ethanol level, the machine subtracts the interfering substance (derived from...

Continue reading