SOBRIETY TESTS

CHALLENGING A ROADSIDE SOBRIETY TESTS

A Breathalyzer reading or a result from another roadside test is an important part of the evidence that police or law enforcement will gather, but these tests can be challenged. A criminal defense lawyer with experience handling drinking and driving charges of OVI here in Ohio (generally called DUI elsewhere) knows how inaccurate these findings can be based on the shortcomings of technology and the human error that can be involved in conducting the roadside test.

The Law Offices of Ravert J. Clark is one of the premier criminal defense firms working in Cincinnati. Attorney Jay Clark often handles federal charges as well as criminal charges at the state level, which has given him the experience of handling hundreds of court cases over the course of 30 years of practice. While we understand that each case is unique, Mr. Clark's trial work, as well as his extensive training, make him an effective litigator who will aggressively defend clients against OVI/DUI charges. His strong and versatile criminal defense background in forensic science and pretrial investigation of crime scenes ensures that he understands how the law applies to the specific circumstances of your case. As he would with a murder case or fraud charges, he listens to your side of the story and then picks away at the prosecution by rooting out all evidence that should not be admissible in court. To learn how Jay Clark can help you, call 513-854-3810.

HOW WE CHALLENGE RESULTS

There are a number of issues that can make evidence inadmissible in court and/or strengthen your case. These include:

• Human error: Each test has a specific protocol to make sure that rights of the accused are not violated. Law enforcement does not always perform these procedures correctly.

• Technological error: A Breathalyzer needs to be properly maintained and operated for it to give an accurate reading.

• Lapse in training: The officer may not have been properly trained to conduct the test even if they were following the guidelines given to them.

• Probable cause: The officer must have probable cause to legally pull someone over. Now with law enforcement's use of car cameras and body cameras, the days of the judge taking the biased opinion of the arresting officer are coming to a close.

• Testing officer does not appear: Judges see it as disrespectful for the officer not to appear before the bench and may rule in your favor. Moreover, the officer is not there to defend the choice to arrest.