Are alleged fallacies in current infrared alcohol breath-testing instruments cause for state legislatures to amend their respective driving under the influence statutes

Driving under the influence of alcohol presents an offense that inflicts human suffering and societal costs upon innocent victims. Despite these consequences, the prosecution of suspected intoxicated drivers has not risen to an exact science, particularly when the trial of these defendants rests upon evidence produced by infrared alcohol breath-testing instruments. These devices are subject to error and attack by expert witnesses since all infrared alcohol breath-testing instruments rely on questionable built-in assumptions and their operation is subject to interfering influences.;Jurisdictions maintaining per se intoxication statutes that require conversion from breath alcohol concentrations to blood alcohol concentrations are susceptible to challenge. Defense counsel assert exculpatory issues due to this compulsory conversion. My survey research discloses that prosecutors in jurisdictions still maintaining such a statute overwhelmingly favor amendment to allow for prosecution of per se offenses based upon either a blood alcohol concentration level or a breath alcohol concentration standard.