Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Academic Blogs -> Instapundit.com
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Academic
: Instapundit.comTHE WAR AGAINST SCIENCE? California Supreme Court Admits, Ignores Breathalyzer Flaws. ?The Califor?
By Glenn Reynolds
THE WAR AGAINST SCIENCE? California Supreme Court Admits, Ignores Breathalyzer Flaws. “The California Supreme Court last Thursday entered a ruling allowing motorists accused of driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) to question the reliability of the breathalyzer machinery used to secure convictions. The decision, however, leaves room for the conviction of drivers even when the machine is proved unreliable.” The technology may not work, but that’s outweighed by the fact that it’s very convenient, and produces a number as a result. . . .
UPDATE: Reader Anthony Argyriou writes:
The article to which you link does not accurately reflect the actual holding in the case.
California DUI law has gotten complicated: there is a crime of DUI, where you are guilty if your judgement and driving skill are impaired by alcohol, and there is the crime of “per se DUI”, where you are guilty if your blood alcohol or breath alcohol levels exceed certain limits. In ordinary DUI, having a blood/breath alcohol level too high creates a rebuttable presumption of guilt. In per se DUI, the blood or breath test result is probative of guilt.
In the particular case, defendant brought up the potential flaws in breath tests. The officer testified to the defendant’s impairment in a variety of other ways, as well as his test results. The jury hung on the “per se DUI”, but convicted on the regular DUI. Defendant claims that the jury instruction regarding the rebuttable presumption was improper, and that a proper instruction may have lead to a hung jury or acquittal. Given all the other evidence presented, that was treated as laughable by the Court.
The court did make a technical change to the process of rebutting the breathalyzer evidence, which is actually in line with improved scientific
knowledge of the flaws of the breathalyzer.
Thanks.
Full post as published by Instapundit.com on July 15, 2009 (boomark / email).
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
Is Barack Obama a Natural Born Citizen?
Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz (Supreme Court): Does Obama meet the constitutional requirements to be President
Unwed Fathers' Rights in Adoption
Landmark Cases in Adoption Law Shape Law with respect to Unwed Fathers
Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Career Choices
Descriptions of law enforcement occupations
Dumb California Laws
Stupid Laws in the Sunshine State
SIGG Admits to Trace BPA in Metal Water Bottles
SIGG Admits to BPA in Metal Water Bottles
Bank Website Security
New Report Finds Widespread Flaws
Ebay Fined
French Court Sets Fine at $61 Million
Personal Injury
Appeals Court Upholds Congressional Legislation
California Labor Laws
alleged violations of California labor laws such as overtime pay, discrimination and harassment.
Tomato Salmonella
Sheetz Convenience Stores agrees to confidential out-of-court settlement with food poisoning victim.

California Supreme Court allows challenges to Breathalyzer results
California Supreme Court says Breathalyzer accuracy can vary
California Supreme Court Ignores Constitutional Rights
Falsifications of Breathalyzer Records Continue
Minnesota finally sues for breathalyzer source code
Tougher DWI Laws Proposed on Breathalyzer Refusal









