By Destiny Gurrola
MODESTO, CA – Defense Attorney James Dunn questioned the credibility of breathalyzers that are standard practice in driving under the influence case, charging in a trial here last Friday in Stanislaus County Superior Court the tests hurts his client’s pursuit of innocence.
The prosecution said the accused was found on the side of the road in his parked car, covered in vomit, with a blood alcohol level above that of the legal amount.
In response, the defense argues the prosecution is simply acting on assumptions and not on evidence which he solidifies by quoting the prosecution saying, “I have to assume.”
It is at this point in the trial that attorney Dunn questioned the credibility of the use of breathalyzers being used being, and that they have been noted previously in similar cases.
According to attorney Dunn, initially the accused “blew” a .09 but then shortly after, blew a 1.0 which, he said, is a recurring issue because the absorption of alcohol in the system affects the results of breathalyzers and can criminalize the innocent.
Dunn told the jury there are multiple published journals pointing to the inaccuracy of the breathalyzer test that is used by police officers, and shown in court.