A NEW JERSEY DWI DEFENSE LAW FIRM
CALL US FOR A FREE CONSULTATION 877-735-2288

breath analyzer
09 January 2015

State v. Chun – Alcotest Litigation and Court Documents

The breath testing machine used in New Jersey DWI is the Draeger Alcotest® 7110 MKIII-C.

We own this machine.  We bought it because we wanted to know, as best as possible, how the machine functions, and to investigate errors in testing.  We utilize this information to fully defend our clients.

There is a case that litigated the scientific reliability and admissibility of this machine.  This case, State v. Chun, was argued before the New Jersey Supreme Court, resulting in a landmark decision that not only affec

breath analyzer

ted how breath testing occurs in New Jersey, but nationwide.  New Jersey is the first state to undergo a scientific reliability hearing on the Alcotest®.

Evan Levow, of Levow DWI Law, represented the lead defendant in the Chun case.

The litigation lasted over 3 years, with 20,000 documents.  The actual in court testimony and challenge of the machine lasted 41 days.  Over 8,300 pages of transcripts were produced, with 13 witnesses testifying, and over 400 exhibits introduced to the Court.

At issue is the admissibility of the breath testing results from the machine to prove intoxication against motorists in New Jersey.  Through extensive cross examination of the State’s witnesses and direct examination of the Defense witnesses, many issues have been set forth regarding the reliability and accuracy of the machine results.

Mr. Levow utilizes the information from State v. Chun to help his clients successfully resolve DWI cases.

Please call us to discuss how we can help you.

State v. Chun Litigation Documents

State v. Chun New Jersey Supreme – Court Opinion – March 17, 2008

Chun Source Code Hearing Report of the Special Master – November 14, 2007

State v. Foley Opinion

Order from State v. Foley

Florida Order Granting Intoxilyzer Sourcecoding

Initial Order from Judge Cantor dated 10/14/05

Defense Response to State’s Motion for Leave to Appeal to the Appellate Division

Appendix to Response Brief to State’s Motion for Leave to Appeal

Supreme Court Order of 12/14/05 Certifying Case to Supreme Court and naming Special Master

Supreme Court Order of 1/10/06 Admitting Alcotest Results During Pendency of Reliability Hearing

Motion for Reconsideration of 1/10/06 Order

Defense Brief in Support of Motion for Reconsideration of 1/10/06 Order

Judge King Discovery Order of 2/3/06

Motion for Funding of Experts

Letter Directing State not to Continue Roll Out of Machine and Order Regarding Expert Funding Motion

Supplemental Management and Discovery Order of March 17, 2006

Protective Order

Order Denying Motion for Reconsideration of 1/10/06 Sua Sponte Order

State v. Chun – Master’s Report

Alcotest Report-Base One Technologies

Report of Thomas Workman, Esq., Defense Consultant

DSDI Static Code Review and Analysis Findings Report

Summary of Software House Findings for Source Code of Draeger Alcotest

Chun Defense Brief

Chun Defense Source Code Reliability Brief