Drunken-Driving Convictions in D.C. Based on Flawed Test - Essay Example

The evaluation of blood-alcohol levels to charge individuals with DUI D.C attorney General Peter Nickels is on record tohaving admitted that over 400 people convicted for driving while intoxicated (DWI) since the fall of 2008, were based on faulty and inaccurate readings (Flaherty M 2010). Forensic evidence has gained acceptance in the past few decades. Evidence is admissible in court, if it is relevant. The headways made in the scientific field especially DNA, has been employed sometimes successfully, to revisit cases that have already been concluded, to exonerate accused who had been convicted at the trial stage. Generally, to be admissible the scientific evidence must have probative value. To add, the evidence has to be shown to have sufficient basis to produce uniform and reasonably consistent results that influence materially to the ascertainment of truth. Like all other criminal cases, the prosecution in DUI offences, have the duty to prove beyond the reasonable doubt that, at the time of the offence, the accused blood alcohol concentration was beyond the statutory limits (levinson D 2002). In most jurisdictions, the statutory limit range from 0.08% to 1%. Consequently, it is crucial for the prosecution to obtain biological samples, for example, blood, urine or expired air that would conclusively prove that the accused blood alcohol level was beyond the statutory limit. Therefore, forensic evidence is paramount, to show that the real blood level concentration, that it exceeded the limit. To obtain the blood alcohol concentration, police extracts body substances of the suspect which they subject to testing. However, in the field, it is impractical to obtain and test blood and urine sample due to the expertise and time required. Therefore, police rely on the use of breath testing devices, (of which breathalyzer is one the various types.), since they are easy to operate, precise and reliable in the field. The breathalyzer operates through testing of the suspect’s expired breath or the alveolar air. It operates on henry’s law that states that at, a constant temperature and pressure, the concentration of a gas that has dissolved in a liquid is proportional to the concentration of the air that is directly above it. Therefore, the alveolar air expired is usually at equilibrium with blood. Consequently, the breathalyzer works on the assumption that the alcohol concentration in the alveolar air has a direct relationship with the blood alcohol concentration, BAC. Upon consumption, alcohol is neither digested nor chemically altered in the circulation. While the blood passing through the lungs, some of the alcohol passes through the membrane and into the air sacs (alveoli) in the lungs, and it evaporates since it is volatile. Therefore, it mixes with the alveoli air, which is subsequently exhaled. Hence, the concentration of alcohol in the air sacs is equivalent to that in that, in the blood. The exhaled air is the one that is detected by the breathalyzer. The alcohol concentration in the alveolar air exhaled is then augmented by a factor referred to as the partition ratio. This is done to relate the reading to BAC, through conversion of the concentration measured in the breath to the matching alcohol concentration in the blood. The breathalyzer works on the assumption that the ratio of the ratio of breath alcohol to blood alcohol is 2100:1. This means that the concentration in every 2100 ml alveolar air is equivalent to that in 1Ml of blood (Begleiter H, Kissin B 1996). The breathalyzer has a mouth piece through which the suspect blows the exhaled air and a sample of the same goes to the sample chamber. What follows is a series of chemical reactions. The breathalyzer contains a system to sample the breath of the suspect, 2 glass vials that contain chemical reaction mixtures, and a series of photocells joined to a meter to that measures the color change that results from the chemical reaction. For effectiveness, the breathalyzer must be administered by a qualified operator and used in accordance with the accepted procedure. However, despite the popularity if Breathalyzers, they do have serious shortcomings. Consider the A.G’s admission stated above (Flaherty M 2010). The A.G stated that the machines were improperly adjusted by the city police, half of the accused being jailed. The improperly calibrated devices would show a driver’s alcohol concentration to be about 20% higher than it actually was. The evidence will be inadmissible where obtained illegally. On august 15, 2009, an appellate court reversed the conviction of City of Toledo employee Gary Groszewski. Mr. Groszewski had been charged and convicted of driving under the intoxicated. He was arrested on December 7, 2006 after his supervisor at the transportation department smelled alcohol in his breathes, and upon being told by other employees that the suspect was driving the vehicle erratically. The supervisor called the suspect to his office, and subjected him to breathalyzer test. The suspect submitted himself to the test since it was a contractual obligation failure of which would result in termination. Groszewski was found to have a level of 0.09, well above the statutory limit of 0.08. While at the hospital, a uniformed police officer, in an unrelated incident was informed of that a city employee was driving under the influence. The officer contacted Groszewski and his supervisor, with the former admitting to have consumed two glasses of wine the previous evening. The officer acknowledged to having not conducted a sobriety test for a while but stated that he was comfortable with the procedure. Later, he was joined by two officers and the accused was placed under arrest. The accused had been found guilty of felony driving on city time and sentenced to 5 years’ probation, including time in a correctional facility. It was the 14th time that the accused had been arrested for driving under the influence. The accused admitted the charges, but in his defense, he argued that he was in the process of reforming, and had in fact enrolled at the University of Toledo to pursue masters in criminal justice. However, the appellate court disagreed with the ruling citing what the court termed as ambush tactics and unlawful seizure, finding that his conviction rested on unconstitutional foundation. This is primarily because the evidence was obtained in an employment related investigation and; therefore, the evidence was sufficient only to terminate him but not to convict him. This was because the accused submitted himself to the test at the request of the employer, and advice of the union representative, with only the potential penalty of losing the job. The court ruled that if an employee is faced with either answering incriminating questions and or forfeiting his job by failing to answer, the forthcoming answer could not be used in a forthcoming criminal trial (Undercover lawyer 2010) References 1. Flaherty M. 400 drunken-driving convictions in D.C. based on flawed test, official says Washington post.2010 April 8. 2. Levinson D. Driving under the influence. Encyclopedia of crime and punishments. 2002: 4: 551 p.g 551 2002. 3. Begleiter H, Kissin B. pharmacokinetics of ethanol: Absorption, Distribution, and Elimination: in, the pharmacology of alcohol and alcohol dependence .1996 Read More