File this under yet another ridiculous Florida ruling. What the heck is up with Florida they days? There seems to be regular occurences of legal stupidity down there.
Apparently hundreds of cases involving breath-alcohol tests have been thrown out by Seminole County judges in the past five months when the defendant asks to see the source code for the breathalyzers used on them and the test's manufacturer will not disclose the source code.
All four of Seminole County's criminal judges have been using a standard that if a DUI defendant asks for a key piece of information about how the machine works - its software source code, for instance - and the state cannot provide it, the breath test is rejected, the Orlando Sentinel reported Wednesday.
Prosecutors have said they do not know how many drunken drivers have been acquitted as a result. But Gino Feliciani, the misdemeanor division chief in the Seminole County State Attorney's Office, said the conviction rate has dropped to 50 percent or less.
Seminole judges have been following the lead of county Judge Donald Marblestone, who in January ruled that although the information may be a trade secret and controlled by a private contractor, defendants are entitled to it.
"Florida cannot contract away the statutory rights of its citizens," the judge wrote. (See full story)
Let's take this further - suppose you get a speeding ticket and you want to force the radar manufacturer to disclose the exact design specifications of the chip components but they refuse. When they balk, you get a free pass from paying any speeding tickets. While I certainly would enjoy free reign to do 80mph on open stretches of road without periodically paying the state-sponsored "tax on high velocity travel" I think this is the dumbest defense I've ever heard. Next, we'll have defendants asking for the design specifications of digital surveillance cameras to make sure they weren't "hacked" to use as another legal loophole defense. No wonder defense lawyers are the most hated profession.Prosecutors have said they do not know how many drunken drivers have been acquitted as a result. But Gino Feliciani, the misdemeanor division chief in the Seminole County State Attorney's Office, said the conviction rate has dropped to 50 percent or less.
Seminole judges have been following the lead of county Judge Donald Marblestone, who in January ruled that although the information may be a trade secret and controlled by a private contractor, defendants are entitled to it.
"Florida cannot contract away the statutory rights of its citizens," the judge wrote. (See full story)
Technorati
Del.icio.us
Slashdot
Digg
People used to take for granted that before the state could imprison you, you could go to court and say "prove it".
The arresting officer has to show up and answer questions. Scientific evidence has to meet the Daubert standards for reliability. The state had better be ready to prove that an instrument really measures what it's supposed to measure within an acceptable margin of error. How do you prove that for a computerized gadget unless *someone* independent has looked at the code? If you can't prove that, then go back to convicting people like you did before breathalyzer machines.
Washington State handled this well: they have the state toxicologist's office certify breathalyzers.
Radar detectors need to be calibrated. Surveillance cameras need to have their records secured from tampering.
All these ideas are a traditional part of criminal law. I get scared when fundamental and long-standing protections get catcalls like "ridiculous" or "stupidity".
Hey, I have nothing against forcing the breathalyzer companies sending their equipment to an independent lab for verifying they work.
I do have a problem with courts forcing a company to give up trade secrets, i.e. the source code when the source code has NOTHING to do with the case.
There are ways of proving a device's accuracy without looking at the source code. I'm sure they have a way of injecting a gaseous spray with a certain amount of alcohol into the breathalyzer and see if the device measures it accurately.
I believe that a 1000 guilty people should be set free lest one innocent man be found guilty. But I don't believe in ridiculous loopholes.
IN DUI CASES WHY ARE YOU PROSUME GUILITY AND HAVE TO PROVE YOUR INNOCENT. WHEN EVEN MOST EVERYTHING ELSE YOU ARE INNOCENT UNTIL PROVENT GUILT. THAT SOUND LIKE MADD RUNS THE COUNTY AND NOT THE CONGRESS/PRESIDENT AND THE CONSTITUTION IS JUST A PRICE OF PAPER.
Sorry guy I hate to say this and it might not be the best place to get my bitterness but the punishment before and after convicted of DUI is stupid and does not solve any problem. Just because you were pulled over or the Cop never even pull you over but you were arrested, you are presumed guilty and the punishment start right there. DMV suspend the license and you are required to go for expensive classes and other cost even before the case if decided in court. What a Justice. Then just visit the clubs block and see how many people are drinking and in one way or another they will get home. Its ridiculous!!
DUI Help - Beat unfair DUI charges with secret tactics and legal loopholes at www.DUIRights.com