One of the most terrifying aspects of DUI defense for younger attorneys is how to challenge the breath test in a DUI case.
Often times young attorneys see the results of the breath test, and ultimately think their case is hopeless.
Especially if there are no issues with probable cause to stop, or arrest.
However the beauty of defending DUI cases is the number of ways evidence can be challenged.
In your typical DUI case there are essentially three ways to challenge the results of the test.
Now please keep in mind these arguments are basic in nature.
Obviously to be successful more depth and detail is required.
But for the purpose of this article, this is to just get an idea peculating on challenging the test.
First challenge the administration of the test.
In most jurisdictions the breath test requires a certain number of steps and procedures in order for the test to be admissible.
Sometimes even if the breath test produces a result, the administration of the test can be incorrect.
Due to this issue it is important to always interview the operator of the test, and thoroughly review any audio or video of the administration of the test.
The second way to challenge the test is to argue against the science.
This argument would be applicable if the breath test has been found admissible in a jury trial.
The breath test machine like any other machine is not infallible.
Regardless of what the police, and prosecution say.
A thorough understanding of how the machine works, how it functions is required to make this argument.
Obviously the Prosecution will argue the test is accurate, and so will their experts.
But sometimes a compelling case can be made towards challenging the science used.
The last way to challenge the breath test is to simply argue it is incorrect.
One of the ways to effectively do this is to compare the Officer observations of the defendant and the alleged results of the breath test.
Lets say for example the defendant did not exhibit any sort of coordination or balance issues.
They did well on the field sobriety tests, and there were no other signs of impairment.
But their alcohol level was well above the legal limit.
Well one of the arguments to make is the results don't match the actual physical evidence.
This is kind of a last ditch argument, and a lot really needs to go in favor of the defense in order for it to be effective.
But it can be a reasonable argument to make if nothing else exists.