Overturning Breath Test Refusals
Controversy over the effectiveness of the CMI Intoxilyzer 8000 has been the subject of conversation lately. Clients state that when they tried to provide a sample for breath testing, the machine would not accept the air sample and the Breath Test Operator would inform the client that they are not using the machine properly. After many tries of alleged incorrect use, the machine operator would state that the client is “refusing a breath test” even though there was no refusal of the machine in the first place.
For many years we have believed that these “machine refusals” are not the client’s fault and we have been successful in getting judges to refuse to allow the State of Florida to use these alleged refusals against our clients.
Now, new information about the CMI Intoxilyzer has come to light and we finally have proof to back up our clients’ statements.
New documents reveal something called an “R-value” and Internal Florida Department of Law Enforcement documents have been discovered that discuss this “R-value.” The “R-value” has a direct impact on the ability of a subject to provide a sample into a breath test machine. When the “R-value” is too low, it can be nearly impossible to provide a sample, thus explaining why clients are forced to repeatedly blow into the machines.
Deposition testimony of an FDLE Department Inspector revealed that there is no way to tell if a “machine refusal” was caused by a driver using the device improperly or because the R-value was too low.
This recent discovery is being researched and analyzed more carefully. We expect to provide more information about the flaws of the Intoxilyzer 8000 and Florida’s breath testing program in the coming weeks.
To learn more about our legal team at Katz & Phillips, P.A. and how we can help protect your rights, contact us today!
