Scottsdale Crime Lab: The Supreme Court's Statement of Issues

Posted on February 17, 2015 by Lawrence Koplow

Today at 11:00 a.m. the Arizona Supreme Court will hear oral arguments regarding whether to reinstate a trial court's finding that - blood alcohol measurements created by the Scottsdale Crime Lab are unreliable.  You can read a history of this litigation by clicking here.

A case being selected by the Supreme Court for review is a rare event.  Simple math shows it is unlikely that any particular case will be reviewed by the Arizona Supreme Court.   The Court receives a substantial amount of “Petitions” to review lower court decisions, but it only selects a small percentage of them each year.  However, because the issues in this case (it is actually a consolidation of 11 cases) will have wide-ranging consequences, it was an ideal case for the Court to review.  The final ruling by the Court, regardless of who prevails, will likely affect how scientific evidence will be handled by Arizona courts for years to come.

While both parties have their own opinions as to what the key issues are, the Court will provide a summary and statement of the issues from their perspective prior to the oral argument.  Last week, as expected, the Court issued its written statement.  Below are the issues as stated in the Court’s summary:

1. Did the Court err by holding that Rule 702(d) challenges are excluded from judicial gatekeeping scrutiny under Arizona law?

2. Did the Court err in using the accuracy of the results as the criteria for a gatekeeping analysis instead of using the trustworthiness of the methodology used to generate the results?

3. Did the Court err in substituting its own judgment for the trial court’s without finding that the trial court’s decision constituted an abuse of discretion?

After reading this statement of the issues, one could jump to a conclusion from the way the issues are framed, that the Court is leaning in a particular the direction.  A word of caution – no one knows how the court is leaning.  The Court’s final opinion could easily list a different set of issues.

Today’s oral argument is being held at Arizona State University Law School.  The argument is open to the public and starts promptly at 11:00 am.  Everyone is welcome to attend – regardless of which side of the argument you are on.

Trackbacks (0) Links to blogs that reference this article Trackback URL
http://duiblog.arizonaduicenter.com/admin/trackback/319600

Continue Reading...

DUI Manslaughter Issues by Fort Lauderdale DUI Lawyer

DUI can be enhanced in several ways, according to Fort Lauderdale DUI attorney William Moore. If the defendant’s blood alcohol content is measured over 0.15, the state can pursue enhancement. If convicted, the defendant will pay higher fines, be required to install an ignition interlock, and face tougher penalties that he would otherwise, including more time in jail. Where a minor is in the car, the penalties are also enhanced in the same way. Involvement in an accident, even if there were no other vehicles involved, also leads to enhancing factors. Leaving the scene after a DUI accident will usually be charged as a separate offense.

DUI causing serious bodily injury and DUI manslaughter are separate from regular DUI and are more serious. Nonetheless, a jury still has the option of convicting a person tried for DUI manslaughter or DUI causing serious bodily injury of simple DUI only, depending on the facts and particular circumstances surrounding the case before them.

What, then, constitutes DUI manslaughter? The driver must first be committing a DUI: driving while his normal faculties are too impaired to do so. This can be demonstrated through a breath or blood alcohol test at or above a 0.08. The state can also, or alternatively, use other evidence such as performance on roadside field sobriety tests, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, damaging statements, or the driver’s demeanor or state of mind.

In addition to simple DUI, however, a conviction for DUI manslaughter also requires the driver to cause or contribute to the death of another person. Usually, this occurs during a traffic accident. However, some prosecutors have been interpreting it more broadly. A Tampa man, for instance, was recently tried for DUI manslaughter after he caused an accident. His BAC was over the legal limit. A good Samaritan stopped to render aid following the accident, but was struck and killed by a third party -- who was also intoxicated. The first driver, who apparently caused the accident, was charged with DUI manslaughter on the theory that he had caused or contributed to the conditions resulting in the good Samaritan’s death. The connection is fairly tenuous and the man was not convicted of DUI manslaughter after trial. The other driver, who struck the good Samaritan, took a plea agreement.

View the original article here

Continue Reading...

Broward DUI Lawyer on the Confrontation Clause & DUI Issues

The Confrontation Clause is found in the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution and states as follows: "in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right...to be confronted with the witnesses against him." This right is applied to prosecutions by states through incorporation by the Fourteenth Amendment, says Fort Lauderdale DUI lawyer Moore.

Crawford v. Washington was a Confrontation Clause case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 2004. Michael Crawford stabbed a man, Kenneth Lee, over a dispute related to Lee's alleged attempt to rape Sylvia Crawford, the wife of the defendant. Crawford claimed that at the time of the stabbing, he was under the impression that Lee had been armed and was thus acting in self-defense. Mrs. Crawford made conflicting statements to the police, first stating that she had not been present during the scuffle and later stating that she was present and Lee was unarmed. Her husband was charged in relation to the stabbing, says Broward DUI attorney Moore.

At trial, the prosecution used a tape of Mrs. Crawford's statement, over the objection of the defense. Mrs. Crawford could not be compelled to testify due to spousal privilege. Further, the defense contended that the defendant could not cross-examine Mrs. Crawford about her statement without the defendant being forced to waive the privilege. Crawford was convicted, but his conviction was overturned by the appellate court, then reinstated by the Washington Supreme Court. Ultimately, the U.S. Supreme Court heard the case. In a landmark decision, the Court held that where a witness would offer testimonial evidence, he or she must be made available for cross-examination by the defendant.

The Confrontation Clause does not, it would seem, apply to machines. This is an important distinction for DUI cases, notes Broward DUI lawyer Moore. Although the company that manufactures the breathalyzer machines used in Florida and other states has been ordered by several courts to release its source code -- the computer programming that tells the machine how to calculate the breath alcohol in the sample produced by a suspect -- the company has repeatedly refused to do so, citing in part a trade secret. However, a DUI defendant can still contest the accuracy of the machines, usually through the use of expert testimony regarding the reliability of the breathalyzer, its biases, and the margin of error inherent in the results produced. In fact, breathalyzer machine operators in the state of Florida must obtain two breath samples within 0.02 of one another in order to proceed with the breath.

View the original article here

Continue Reading...

Broward DUI Attorney -- Drivers License Administrative Suspension Issues

A DUI arrest in the state of Florida can be devastating. It can have a long-term effect on your future, including your prospects for employment, or even continuing at the job you already have. For many, a valid driver's license is necessary for work. Truck drivers and taxi operators come to mind immediately, but other professions require that workers drive regularly. For example, Fort Lauderdale DUI lawyer William Moore drives to court. Even driving just to get to your place of employment is important, as is driving children or other family members to school, doctor's appointments, and the like.

After a driver is arrested for driving under the influence in Florida, he or she has only 10 days in which to formally challenge the administrative suspension of his or her drivers license by the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles. Broward DUI lawyer Moore provides representation at these hearings. The arresting law enforcement officer may appear at the hearing and provide testimony regarding the reasons for the traffic stop. The administrative suspension of the drivers license is a separate matter from the criminal case. In fact, even if a defendant goes to trial and is found not guilty of DUI by a judge or jury, the driver's license suspension by the FDHSMV is not invalidated at that point. If the defendant did not successfully challenge the suspension in the 10 day period following the arrest, the drivers license will not be reinstated until after the suspension period runs and the defendant applies for reinstatement with the FDHSMV, according to Broward DUI lawyer Moore.

It is important to remember not to drive unless your license is valid. Drivers licenses can be suspended for failure to pay tickets, a DUI arrest, and having child support in arrears. However, driving with a suspended license may sound like a simple traffic ticket, but is actually a fairly serious criminal matter. It is not uncommon in many jurisdictions in Florida for the prosecutor to seek significant time in jail -- for instance, 30 days -- simply for an arrest for operating a motor vehicle with a suspended license. Such an arrest could also constitute a violation of the terms of dui probation, which usually includes reporting, attending DUI school, attending a victim impact panel, the payment of various fees and fines, and not driving or picking up new criminal charges. In terms of operation of a motor vehicle in violation of a drivers license suspension, the definition of what constitutes a motor vehicle can also be fairly broad, encompassing many of the scooters popular to cruise around the beach in Fort Lauderdale.

View the original article here

Continue Reading...