The purpose of the breathalyzer test is to measure a person's blood alcohol content (BAC). The Breathalyzer, which is the most commonly used BAC tester today, was invented in 1954. It detects and measures the level of alcohol on a person's breath with the use of a chemical reaction. A Breathalyzer test kit contains several vials of chemicals of differing colors that change color when they come into contact with alcohol. The color changes indicate the amount of alcohol.
Breathalyzer test results can be challenged in court; it is possible for a law enforcement officer to administer the test incorrectly. This form is a generic example that may be referred to when preparing such a form for your particular state. It is for illustrative purposes only. Local laws should be consulted to determine any specific requirements for such a form in a particular jurisdiction.
Ohio Motion In Liming to Exclude Breathalyzer Results for Failure to Follow Observation Protocols — DUI Keywords: Ohio, Motioeliminatene, Exclude Breathalyzer Results, Failure to Follow Observation Protocols, DUI Description: If you are facing a DUI charge in Ohio, one possible defense strategy is to file a Motion in Liming to exclude the breathalyzer results from being used as evidence against you. This motion can be specifically targeted towards the failure of law enforcement officers to follow proper observation protocols during the breathalyzer test administration. In Ohio, there are different types of Motions in Liming that can be filed to exclude breathalyzer results for failure to follow observation protocols in DUI cases. These motions typically argue that the breathalyzer test results should be deemed inadmissible due to improper handling or failure to adhere to established protocols, thereby challenging the reliability of the results. One type of Motion in Liming that can be filed is based on the failure of the officer to properly observe the driver for a specified period before administering the breathalyzer test. Ohio Revised Code requires officers to observe the driver for a minimum of 20 minutes before conducting the test. If the officer fails to fulfill this requirement, it can be argued that the breathalyzer results should be excluded as the lack of proper observation might affect the accuracy of the readings. Another type of motion may focus on the failure of the officer to document the observation period adequately. Officers are required to document and record the observation period in their reports accurately. If there are inconsistencies or discrepancies in the documentation regarding observation protocols, it can be argued that the breathalyzer results should be deemed inadmissible. Additionally, a Motion in Liming can be filed if the officer did not properly explain the observation protocols to the driver or if the officer failed to inform the driver of their right to an independent blood test, as required by Ohio law. These failures can be used to challenge the reliability and admissibility of the breathalyzer results in court. In summary, when facing a DUI charge in Ohio, it may be worth exploring the option of filing a Motion in Liming to exclude breathalyzer results for failure to follow observation protocols. By challenging the accuracy and reliability of the breathalyzer test results, you may have a chance to weaken the prosecution's case against you. It is crucial to consult with a knowledgeable DUI defense attorney to determine the most suitable strategy for your specific case.
