I got a DUI while driving my dad’s boat – Will they take it?

I got a DUI while driving my dad’s boat – Will they take it?

I was out driving my dad’s boat on the lake and I got caught drinking. Can they take the boat away from my dad who was not with me?

Happy Father’s Day – Dad

No, in most cases, they likely won’t take your dad’s boat away for you getting a DUI while driving it.

They Could Tow it and impound it if there is no one sober there and that will cost you a bundle.

However, there could be some consequences for your dad depending on the specifics:

  • Repossession for fines: If the fines associated with your DUI are very high, the court could potentially order the boat to be sold to pay them off, but this is uncommon.
  • Insurance issues: A DUI could raise your dad’s boat insurance rates, or the company might even cancel the policy altogether. Without insurance, the boat couldn’t be legally operated.

The bigger issue here is you and the DUI. Boating under the influence (BUİ) is a serious offense in Michigan, similar to a DUI on land.

Here are some resources you might find helpful:

  • Information on Michigan BUIs: [Michigan boating under the influence ON Michigan.gov (.gov) michigan.gov]
  • Help and resources for DUIs: [National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (.gov) nhtsa.gov]

But here is the real resource you will need.
The phone number to my office.

Komorn Law 248-357-2550

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

Other Articles

What is the Exclusionary Rule?

What is the Exclusionary Rule?

What is the Exclusionary Rule?The Exclusionary Rule is a legal principle in the United States that prevents the government from using most evidence gathered in violation of the United States Constitution. Specifically, it applies to evidence obtained through an...

I am going to Canada – Can I bring my cannabis?

I am going to Canada – Can I bring my cannabis?

Borders and Cannabis and MoneyFerengi Rule of Acquisition #41. Profit is its own reward.If you bring your own cannabis to Canada. How does the Canadian government profit?  They don't so they will punish you if you get caught. It's simple. It's about the money. That is...

Squatters in Michigan

Squatters in Michigan

SquattersSquatting, in one definition is the unauthorized occupation of a property, can be a frustrating ordeal for property owners in Michigan. Understanding the relevant laws and procedures is crucial for regaining possession of your property.Squatting vs. Adverse...

Vehicle Forfeiture in Canada – The Process of Taking

Vehicle Forfeiture in Canada – The Process of Taking

Thank You... and have a nice day eh!Disclaimer: We are not Attorneys in Canada.  This is an article of information obtained from various sources and presented here. We can only assume they are accurate.  If you ever find a reason to go to Canada and need a lawyer...we...

Boating in Michigan on Alcohol and Drugs – It’s Illegal

Boating in Michigan on Alcohol and Drugs – It’s Illegal

If it’s got a motor, it’s a BUI

We got lakes, we got boats, we got alcohol, we got cannabis all the fun you can possibly find on a holiday weekend in the summer. Just don’t combine them all or you’ll be calling us or your cousin Vinny. 

Operating a Boat Under the Influence (OUI)

Michigan law strictly prohibits operating a motorboat under the influence of alcohol or drugs, similar to driving under the influence (DUI) laws. This applies to all vessels with a motor, including personal watercraft (PWCs) [MCL 324.80176]. There are two main ways a boater can be considered OUI:

  • Blood Alcohol Content (BAC): A BAC of 0.08% or greater is considered operating under the influence. This is determined by a breath, blood, or urine test administered by a law enforcement officer.
  • Visible Impairment: Regardless of BAC, if an officer observes the boater’s ability to operate the vessel is visibly impaired by alcohol or drugs, they can be arrested for OUI.

Visible Impairment means anything they say it means!!

The consequences of a BUI conviction in Michigan can be severe. A first offense is typically a misdemeanor, punishable by fines, jail time, and the loss of boating privileges. Multiple convictions within ten years escalate the offense to a felony, carrying harsher penalties. Additionally, causing serious injury or death while boating under the influence can result in felony charges with significant prison sentences.

324.80176 Operation of or authorizing operation of motorboat while under influence of alcoholic liquor or controlled substance prohibited; visible impairment; violation as felony; penalty; “serious impairment of a body function” defined; operation by person less than 21 years of age; “any bodily alcohol content” defined; requirements; “operate” defined.

Sec. 80176.

    (1) A person shall not operate a motorboat on the waters of this state if any of the following apply:
    (a) The person is under the influence of alcoholic liquor or a controlled substance, or both.
    (b) The person has a blood alcohol content of 0.08 grams or more per 100 milliliters of blood, per 210 liters of breath, or per 67 milliliters of urine.
    (c) The person has in his or her body any amount of a controlled substance listed in schedule 1 under section 7212 of the public health code, 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.7212, or a rule promulgated under that section, or of a controlled substance described in section 7214(a)(iv) of the public health code, 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.7214.

Passengers and Alcohol Consumption

While there is no specific law prohibiting passengers from drinking alcohol on a boat in Michigan, it’s important to be aware of the potential dangers. Excessive alcohol consumption can impair judgment and coordination, increasing the risk of accidents or falls overboard. Passengers who are intoxicated may also become loud or disruptive, distracting the operator and jeopardizing the safety of everyone on board.

Here are some safety tips for passengers:

  • Drink responsibly and in moderation.
  • Be aware of your surroundings and potential hazards.
  • Remain seated while the boat is in motion.
  • Wear a life jacket at all times.

Additional Safety Considerations

Boating safety goes beyond just avoiding alcohol. Here are some other crucial aspects to remember:

  • Boating education: Taking a boating safety course can equip you with the knowledge and skills to navigate safely. Michigan requires boaters born after June 30, 1996, to complete a boating safety course to operate a motorboat or PWC https://www.michigan.gov/dnr/things-to-do/boating/safety-certificate.
  • Life jackets: Ensure everyone on board has a properly fitting life jacket readily available and consider wearing them at all times.
  • Boating equipment: Have all necessary safety equipment on board, including fire extinguishers, flares, and signaling devices.
  • Weather conditions: Always check the weather forecast before heading out and be prepared for sudden changes.
  • Local regulations: Be aware of any specific boating regulations or restrictions that may apply to the water body you’re on.

Law Firm VIctories

Your Rights

Alcohol, Drugs, Kayaking – It could be a problem

Alcohol, Drugs, Kayaking – It could be a problem

Can I drink alcohol and smoke cannabis if I’m canoeing or kayaking or tubing or paddleboarding or just floating around?

While Michigan law doesn’t explicitly forbid consuming alcohol on non-motorized vessels like canoes or kayaks, it’s strongly discouraged for safety reasons. Here’s why:

  • Impaired judgment: Alcohol affects your balance, coordination, and decision-making abilities. Even a small amount can significantly increase your risk of tipping over or making poor choices on the water.

  • Hypothermia risk: Alcohol can interfere with your body’s ability to regulate temperature. Falling into cold water while under the influence can lead to hypothermia much faster.

  • Drowning risk: Impaired judgment and slowed reflexes can make it difficult to react quickly in an emergency situation.

  • Legal consequences: Public intoxication laws might apply if your behavior becomes disruptive or unsafe due to alcohol.

…and public consumption of cannabis is not allowed.

Public consumption is not permitted. Driving under the influence of marijuana is not permitted. Individuals cannot cross state lines with marijuana.

Marijuana in Michigan: What You Need to Know

Law Firm VIctories

Your Rights

An Independent Review of the Intoxilyzer 9000

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

I got a DUI while driving my dad’s boat – Will they take it?

I got a DUI while driving my dad’s boat – Will they take it?

I was out driving my dad's boat on the lake and I got caught drinking. Can they take the boat away from my dad who was not with me?Happy Father's Day - DadNo, in most cases, they likely won't take your dad's boat away for you getting a DUI while driving it. They Could...

Boating in Michigan on Alcohol and Drugs – It’s Illegal

Boating in Michigan on Alcohol and Drugs – It’s Illegal

If it's got a motor, it's a BUIWe got lakes, we got boats, we got alcohol, we got cannabis all the fun you can possibly find on a holiday weekend in the summer. Just don't combine them all or you'll be calling us or your cousin Vinny. Operating a Boat Under the...

Alcohol, Drugs, Kayaking – It could be a problem

Alcohol, Drugs, Kayaking – It could be a problem

Can I drink alcohol and smoke cannabis if I'm canoeing or kayaking or tubing or paddleboarding or just floating around?While Michigan law doesn't explicitly forbid consuming alcohol on non-motorized vessels like canoes or kayaks, it's strongly discouraged for safety...

An Independent Review of the Intoxilyzer 9000

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, EMAForensic CriminalistThe opportunity to conduct an...

More Posts

Seattle settles case involving – the rights of nature

Seattle settles case involving – the rights of nature

The Rights of NatureSeattle settled a lawsuit brought by the Sauk-Suiattle Tribe on behalf of salmon harmed by dams on the Skagit River. This is one of the first "rights of nature" cases in the US, and the tribe argued that the lack of fish passage measures violated...

read more
NY judge fines unlicensed cannabis shops $15 million

NY judge fines unlicensed cannabis shops $15 million

It's their corner now“This punishment should serve as a clear warning for all unlicensed cannabis stores in the state: we will enforce the law and shut down your operations,” state Attorney General Letitia James saidThe owner of seven unlicensed cannabis shops in New...

read more
Vehicle Forfeiture in Canada – The Process of Taking

Vehicle Forfeiture in Canada – The Process of Taking

Thank You... and have a nice day eh!Disclaimer: We are not Attorneys in Canada.  This is an article of information obtained from various sources and presented here. We can only assume they are accurate.  If you ever find a reason to go to Canada and need a lawyer...we...

read more
Alcohol, Drugs, Kayaking – It could be a problem

Alcohol, Drugs, Kayaking – It could be a problem

Can I drink alcohol and smoke cannabis if I'm canoeing or kayaking or tubing or paddleboarding or just floating around?While Michigan law doesn't explicitly forbid consuming alcohol on non-motorized vessels like canoes or kayaks, it's strongly discouraged for safety...

read more
The Intoxilyzer 9000 (part 1)

The Intoxilyzer 9000 (part 1)

The Intoxilyzer 9000 (part 1 of 2)

Roll-Out

The Michigan State Police (MSP) initiated Intoxilyzer 9000 (Intoxilyzer) training for police officers statewide, commencing in 2023. In order to participate, officers were required to complete both preliminary breath test (PBT) operator certification and PBT calibration certification.

Then officers were required to complete a PowerPoint training before attending a two-hour hands-on training session in person with MSP.

In July 2023, MSP commenced the installation of the Intoxilyzer at each jail or police agency that possessed a DataMaster DMT (DataMaster) and replaced the existing machine. By mid-October 2023, the new device was expected to be installed in all areas of the state.

Technical Differences

The DataMaster utilizes a pair of filters to effectively differentiate ethanol (the sought-after consumable alcohol by the police) from other organic compounds.

The narrow bandpass optical filters, centered at 3.44 microns, are strategically designed to isolate the specific wavelengths of light absorbed by alcohol and effectively block out any other interfering wavelengths. These filters, placed in the optical path, ensure accurate measurement of the unknown substance by precisely filtering out unwanted light.

However, it is worth noting that methanol and acetone can also be absorbed at the 3.4 micron level, meaning that the device may potentially register acetone or methanol as ethanol. This issue becomes particularly critical for individuals with diabetes who are experiencing ketoacidosis, as they tend to have acetone present in their airways.

The Intoxilyzer has four filters, including one in the 9 micron level, where ethanol and acetone do not appear. This should mean the Intoxilyzer is better able to filter out acetone and methanol.

However, because CMI, Inc. (CMI), the company that sells the Intoxilyzer, will not sell an Intoxilyzer to any entity other than law enforcement, this principle cannot be tested.

The Intoxilyzer’s filters utilize pulsed infrared technology, effectively eliminating the need for chopper motors or mechanical filters in the analytical system. Instead, it employs a digitally controlled pulsed infrared source, eliminating the use of moving parts and thus enhancing the durability of the filter mechanism, ensuring long-lasting performance.

In addition, the DataMaster used a quartz internal standard to make sure the machine remained in calibration. Quartz is a stable material with a known absorption rate.

The DataMaster would move a thin quartz plate in front of the infrared beam and the machine would compare the absorption to the known absorption rate at its initial calibration. If it was within tolerance, the DataMaster would report, “internal standard verified.”

The Intoxilyzer has done away with the quartz internal standard in favor of an actual dry-gas test to verify that the machine remains in calibration.

While CMI touts the dry-gas test as a better internal standard, there are two issues that may make it not as good as a constant standard like the quartz plate.

First, the dry gas is supposed to be measured at 0.08, but the Intoxilyzer allows any result between 0.074 to 0.084 to verify the machine’s internal standard.

The target of 0.08, which is affected by changes in barometric pressure, is addressed by the dry-gas test through an automated adjustment process. This adjustment is made using an algorithm including a correction factor based on the barometer reading at the time of the test.

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

Related Articles

Government Drones in Your Life – Yes, They Made up a Reason

Government Drones in Your Life – Yes, They Made up a Reason

Long Lake Township v. Maxon The Costs Outweigh Benefits in Exclusionary Rule Application and the Slippery Slope of Fourth Amendment ProtectionsThe recent decision by the Michigan Supreme Court in Long Lake Township v. Maxon represents a significant shift in the...

More Posts

The Intoxilyzer 9000 (part 2)

The Intoxilyzer 9000 (part 2)

The Intoxilyzer 9000 (part 2 of 2)

Using it

The Intoxilyzer is user-friendly and equipped with a built-in feature to alert officers of any potential issues. As a precautionary measure, officers are specifically advised to switch off their portable radios prior to collecting a breath sample, as the Intoxilyzer has the capability to detect and notify the presence of radio frequency interference (RFI).

The display screen will also prompt the officer to enter their certification date, ensuring that it is up to date. It will verify if the 15-minute observation period has been completed, allowing the officer to proceed if they select yes. However, if they select no, the Intoxilyzer will not permit the officer to continue.

The device has the capability to enforce a 15-minute waiting period, ensuring that it actually takes place rather than simply allowing the officer to check a box. However, MSP made the decision not to include this function.

And, compared to the DataMaster’s requirement for manual entry of the start time for the 15-minute waiting period, the Intoxilyzer simplifies the process by prompting the officer to confirm whether the waiting period has been fulfilled with a simple yes or no response.

For these reasons, attorneys must carefully review the police videos to determine if the required 15-minute observation period was indeed fulfilled.

Functionally, there have been observations that the Intoxilyzer presents some challenges in terms of blowing into it, potentially hindering its proper functionality due to inadequate air intake. However, opinions on this matter may vary among individuals.

The Intoxilyzer 9000 Ticket

The Intoxilyzer tickets consist of two pages, providing a wealth of information. For a glimpse of a sample ticket, please refer to exhibit A—Michigan Forensic Breath Alcohol Analytical Report.

The ticket will show the “subject result 1” and “subject result 2,” indicating the outcomes of the initial and subsequent breath samples.

In addition to providing the officer with the breath alcohol concentration (BrAC), the ticket also serves as a guide to familiarize them with the proper functioning of the device.

If the reading shows a difference of .10 and .11, the officer will likely assume that the machine is functioning correctly. However, if the readings differ significantly, such as .10 and .14, it is crucial for the machine to promptly notify the officer of a potential issue.

A third breath sample will then be requested of the driver.

If a driver fails to provide an adequate breath sample, rather than showing “subject result 1” or “subject result 2,” the display will indicate “incomplete test.” This can also occur due to other reasons, which brings into question the reliability of this statement and its potential to be considered as hearsay.

The Histogram

Page two of the ticket features a histogram, a graphical representation of the slope detector. This histogram displays two lines: one represents the breath sample, while the other (the thicker line) represents the alcohol level. The inclusion of this histogram on the ticket is a response to the demand from defense attorneys.

Where the two lines intersect represents the BrAC, although the readability is hindered by the histogram box’s size.

In addition, fluctuations in the alcohol line, with an initial rise followed by a dip and another rise, could possibly suggest the existence of mouth alcohol.

Lawyers should pay close attention to histograms that display this particular pattern without identifying the results as invalid samples.

Acceptable Range – Like the DataMaster, the control test in the Intoxilyzer must be within a certain range.

The DataMaster was 5 percent either way (.076 to .084). For reasons unknown to these authors, the Intoxilyzer is allowed to be further out of tolerance on the low side (.074 to .084).

The expiration date at the bottom of the second page signifies the end life of the dry gas bottle. It should be noted that any officer has the authority to replace the bottle and input the lot number and expiration date. Consequently, officers are able to choose any date after the test date. However, it is imperative for all agencies to procure replacement bottles from the MSP.

Training Requirements

Administrative Rule Changes Regarding Classification. Police officers must be certified on administering a PBT now (class I) and calibrating the PBT (class II).

The operator must be class II or higher for the DataMaster and class III or higher for the Intoxilyzer. The higher classes are for officers who can train others on the Intoxilyzer and then for officers who can calibrate the device.

Each certified class operator may train a lower class operator. See AC, R 325.2658. The amended rules state that to maintain a class III certification, each class III operator certified after January 1, 2022, is required to recertify every two years. Id.

Operators certified before January 1, 2022, are required to recertify before December 31, 2023, and every two years after that. Id.

Accuracy

Officers are required to enter their certification date into the Intoxilyzer while operating it. The certification date listed on the first page of the breath test ticket shows the officer’s date of certification or recertification.

Defense attorneys should verify this information with the Michigan Commission on Law Enforcement Standards because an officer may forget to recertify. The Intoxilyzer does not verify the information an officer enters into it.

Ultimately, defense attorneys must remember to verify that the officer has the necessary training and certifications. Furthermore, because the certification date, 15-minute observation time, and dry-gas expiration date are easy to manipulate, defense attorneys should verify those numbers as accurate.

Of course, this does not mean that police are going to go out there and try to manipulate the system, but if an officer forgets to recertify on time or cannot remember the actual date of their training, an officer could simply enter any date that would not yet be expired to get the Intoxilyzer to accept a breath sample from an arrested subject, and there is no way the Intoxilyzer will know whether it is accurate.

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

Operation

Information That Must Be Entered into the Intoxilyzer

For the Intoxilyzer to function, an officer must enter the following:

• subject’s information (from the license)
• officer’s operator number
• officer’s certification date
• yes to the 15-minute observation time prompt

The 15-Minute Observation Period for Multiple Subjects

There is no 15-minute lockout on the Intoxilyzer, although the device is capable of such a feature. The idea is that an officer may be observing a subject while another officer is using the machine with a separate subject and thus not need an additional 15 minutes for his subject.

Thus, rather than making the second officer start a new 15-minute observation period, the officer can simply answer that the waiting period has been satisfied.

Note that even the MSP training materials recognize that the 15-minute observation period is the most litigated issue in breath testing, but then the MSP turned off the 15-minute lockout feature.

Thus, this issue should be investigated fully by the defense attorney.

Testing Sequence

The Intoxilyzer’s testing sequence is vastly different from that of the DataMaster as it includes a control test within the testing sequence. The Intoxilyzer’s testing sequences are the following:

• operational diagnostic test
• air blank
• subject sample
• air blank
• control test at 0.08 percent
• air blank
• rest
• air blank
• subject sample
• air blank
• operational diagnostic test
• air blank

Like the DataMaster, the Intoxilyzer runs internal diagnostic tests to make sure it is in working order. In addition, like the DataMaster, the Intoxilyzer runs air blanks to make sure it purges any contaminants in the breath test tube. The air blanks cause the breath tube to suck in the ambient air in the room. If it detects other sources of alcohol during that process, it is supposed to abort the test and notify the officer to start over.

A major change from the DataMaster is that the Intoxilyzer will run a dry-gas calibration test targeting 0.08 between subject samples. This is the same test that the DataMaster automatically runs once per week.

Because the Intoxilyzer runs the dry-gas test between each subject sample, the MSP is no longer required to perform the weekly dry-gas calibration tests required of the DataMaster. AC, R 325.2653(2). Under the amended rules, the Intoxilyzer requires a full calibration check twice per calendar year. AC, R 325.2653(4).

There is no requirement that these two tests be 180 days apart. They can be on consecutive days or 364 days apart.

Each subject test sequence (and each calibration check done by a law enforcement department) “must be retained either in log form by the agency where the instrument is installed or electronically within the instruments memory.” AC, R 325.2653(2).

Another notable difference between the DataMaster and the Intoxilyzer is that the DataMaster reported the test results truncated to the second digit (e.g., 0.08), while the Intoxilyzer will report the results to the third digit (e.g., 0.080). The allowable variances between the first and second tests remain the same as the allowable variances for the DataMaster.

A Budget?

It is unclear at this point whether there are any differences in the uncertainty budget between the Datamaster and the Intoxilyzer.

In Georgia and Texas, the uncertainty budgets are different but both are around 5–6 percent, although Texas’s rules allow a variation of up to 12 percent between dry-gas tests. Michigan allows the dry-gas calibration check to vary between 6.7 and 8.8 percent.

This should not be confused with an uncertainty budget, which the MSP said it intended to calculate for each machine at installation.

Scan that Driver License

The officer can enter the driver’s information in a few different ways. One way is to use the magnetic strip on the back of the driver’s license. An officer can also use the bar code scanner and scan the back of the driver’s license.

Or the officer may simply use the keyboard to manually enter the information. By scanning it, it is less likely the information entered will be incorrect.

Attorneys

Attorneys need to be familiar with the information on the evidence ticket and be prepared to address any inconsistencies between the histogram and the reported results.

They also need to make sure to have reviewed evidence tickets from before and after the tests of their own client to see if there were any problems with the dry-gas tests. These additional records will likely not be provided with discovery material because they involve subject samples from individuals not related to the case. As such, attorneys will need to request these additional records through the Freedom of Information Act, MCL 15.231 et seq.

 Finally, attorneys should make sure that they get copies of the twice-annual calibration checks to see if there were any issues.

It is important to remember that while the Intoxilyzer is a new machine, the basics of drunk driving law have not changed. Attorneys should nonetheless study the differences between the two devices and pursue any issues.

As previously discussed, the amended administrative rules require police officers to recertify every two years, which was not a requirement in the past.

With the DataMaster, an officer could be certified to operate it, be off the road for ten years (maybe assigned to the detective bureau for example), then go back on patrol and still be able to operate a DataMaster.

For the Intoxilyzer, attorneys have another item to consider for possible defenses if an officer fails to recertify.

Related Articles

Government Drones in Your Life – Yes, They Made up a Reason

Government Drones in Your Life – Yes, They Made up a Reason

Long Lake Township v. Maxon The Costs Outweigh Benefits in Exclusionary Rule Application and the Slippery Slope of Fourth Amendment ProtectionsThe recent decision by the Michigan Supreme Court in Long Lake Township v. Maxon represents a significant shift in the...

More Posts