Help

ALERT

Please note that MCLE will be closed on Monday, April 15, 2024 in observance of Patriots Day.

Understanding Breath Testing

Challenging the OAT and understanding EOPSS documents

  • Product Number: 2180179WBC
  • CLE Credits, earn up to:
    3 substantive credits, 0 ethics credits CLE Credit Note
  • Add to Favorites List

Choose Date/Location:

Registration for this program is closed
  • Product Description
  • Agenda & Materials
  • Faculty
  • Product Description

    Product Description

    Since Judge Robert Brennan issued a decision in Commonwealth v. Ananias stating that breath test results obtained from a Draeger 9510 breath test device that was last calibrated between June 2011 and September 14, 2014 are presumptively excluded from evidence, it was learned that the Office of Alcohol Testing (OAT) withheld court ordered discovery and exculpatory information. The Executive Office of Public Safety and Security ("EOPSS") investigated OAT’s discovery practices which brought many troubling pieces of information to light: "OAT failed to provide prosecutors with hundreds of "incomplete" certification worksheets, documentary evidence that breath testing instruments had failed to properly calibrate during OAT’s certification process; OAT generated records that reflected when breath test instruments were sent to their manufacturer for repair; and internal testing records that would appear to fall squarely into the category of documents that had been ordered to be produced in pending criminal prosecutions."

    In this seminar, the expert faculty prepares you to effectively challenge the results of breath tests. The technical issues will be broken down so that you understand what the problems with the machines were. The faculty also reviews and summarizes the 670+ pages released by EOPSS. Walk through the discovery involved in a breathalyzer case with the attorneys involved in this landmark litigation. What should you ask for? What should you look for in the documents you receive? Where in the produced discovery are challengeable issues or flaws with the testing revealed? Finally, the expert faculty explain how this most recent breath testing failure may apply to OUI prosecutions obtained from other breath test devices and specifically address accuracy problems with the Draeger Units that date back over 12 years.

  • Agenda

    Agenda & Materials

    Please Note

    MCLE webcasts are delivered completely online, underscoring their convenience and appeal. There are no published print materials. All written materials are available electronically only. They are posted 24 hours prior to the program and can be accessed, downloaded, or printed from your computer.

  • Faculty

    Chair

    Joseph D. Bernard, Esq., Law Offices of Joseph D. Bernard, PC, Springfield

    Faculty

    James M. Milligan, Jr., Esq., Law Office of James M. Milligan, Jr., Hanover
    Casey E. Silvia, Esq., Appeals Court, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Boston
TOP