An Independent Review of the Intoxilyzer 9000

An Independent Review of the Intoxilyzer 9000

Part 1 – Residual mouth alcohol detection

Counterpoint Volume 2; Issue 2 – Article 3 (August 2017)

An article in the Core Skills III-2 Module

Jan Semenoff, BA, EMA
Forensic Criminalist

The opportunity to conduct an independent analysis and performance review of a new breath alcohol testing device is rare, particularly the higher-end, evidentiary-level units.

Access to these technologies is stringently controlled by both their manufacturers and the police and government agencies that control them.

Additionally, state agencies are often reluctant to publish the results of their official assessments and analysis of the devices.

When given the opportunity to perform such a review on a new Intoxilyzer 9000, I designed a series of experiments to quickly analyze the overall performance of the device.

I attended the device’s location with colleague Tom Workman (1948 – 2019) to determine its suitability and reliability in a number of key areas, including:

  • Overall design and ease of use
  • Accuracy in determining in vitro [2] BrAC levels using a simulator
  • The ability of the device to determine the presence of Fresh Mouth Alcohol using a Residual
  • Alcohol Detection System (RADS) or the so-called “slope detector”.
  • Reliability in reporting BrAC [3] readings that are highly specific to ethanol
  • The effect of Radio Frequency Interference on the device [4]​

​This article will provide a general overview of the operational characteristics of the Intoxilyzer 9000. We will additionally look at the apparent accuracy of the device using simulator readings, and examine the ability of the device to “flag” false positive reading caused by fresh mouth alcohol contamination.

Attorney Michael Komorn

Attorney Michael Komorn

State / Federal Legal Defense

With extensive experience in criminal legal defense since 1993 from pre-arrest, District, Circuit, Appeals, Supreme and the Federal court systems.

KOMORN LAW (248) 357-2550

Read the rest of Part One here

Parts two and three are in the drop down menu at the site but not easy to notice. The links are below if you have trouble.

Part Two and Part Three will examine the unit’s specificity towards ethanol detection and its ability to identify the presence of an interferent chemical, and the capacity of the device to detect Radio Frequency Interference.

Related Articles

No Results Found

The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.

More Posts

Prosecutors drop marijuana charges against Michigan mom

Prosecutors drop marijuana charges against Michigan mom

Aug 5, 2015 - After a year long battle,  Michigan Attorney Michael Komorn and his staff have chalked up another positive conclusion for a client caught up in the medical marijuana and forfeiture debacle. Some may consider it  a win, but this slow ruination of a family...

read more
Security Systems – You should have one!!

Security Systems – You should have one!!

For most... a security video system is a tool to protect themselves from liability, false accusations and identify activities around their home or business.  For some,  such as thieves, those who make false accusations and liars...it works against them.   There...

read more
What’s required of you in a Michigan traffic stop?

What’s required of you in a Michigan traffic stop?

July 24, 2015 Dashcam video released this week from a traffic stop shows how a confrontation between a Texas woman and the arresting officer escalated. Given the circumstances in the aforementioned Sandra Bland case, we wanted to find out what is allowed and not...

read more
Detroit police make arrests at marijuana dispensary

Detroit police make arrests at marijuana dispensary

The Detroit police raided and made arrests at marijuana dispensary in an article in the Detroit Free Press from July  14, 2015. Detroit police arrested two people and confiscated two firearms and drugs during a raid on a marijuana dispensary Tuesday afternoon. Police...

read more
Michigan Medical Marihuana Patient Bill of Rights

Michigan Medical Marihuana Patient Bill of Rights

On November 8th, 2008, by a majority of 63 percent, the citizens of the State of Michigan voted into law the constitutional initiative, Initiated Law 1 of 2008, ratified into law December 4, 2008, herein referred to as the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act, MCL 333.26421...

read more
Reform Today’s Forfeiture Laws

Reform Today’s Forfeiture Laws

Everyday, I get calls to my office from medical marijuana patients and caregivers who have been raided or pulled over by police. Often times, these individuals are not arrested, and little if any paperwork is left behind by the various Narcotics Enforcement Teams....

read more
KOMORN LAW NEWSLETTER ISSUE #1 May 2015

KOMORN LAW NEWSLETTER ISSUE #1 May 2015

The Michigan Legal Advisor News Letters. Read the current newsletter from Michigan's #1 Medical Marijuana Defense Attorney Michael Komorn.  KOMORN LAW NEWSLETTER ISSUE #1 May 2015     Michael Komorn is recognized as a leading expert on the Michigan Medical...

read more
Michael Komorn-Criminal Defense Attorney

About Your Attorney

Attorney Michael Komorn

Categories

Other Topics

Driving Under the Influence

No Results Found

The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.

Michigan

Your Rights

Michigan Court of Appeals

Law Firm VIctories

Share This