Breath And Blood Evidence Is Crucial When Charged With Operating While Intoxicated

During a trial, the prosecution will try to admit as much evidence against a defendant in an attempt to show their guilt. It is the defense attorney’s job to do everything possible to object to evidence’s admittance and try to suppress or otherwise get it excluded. In cases involving operating while intoxicated or impaired, the most crucial evidence is the breath and blood evidence. Such evidence is very compelling to a jury to convict, so it is vital that your defense attorney dispute its admittance into evidence.

In a trial Jeffrey T. McCarty had in Royal Oak, and through aggressive advocacy and experienced cross examination of the witnesses, he was able to successfully get the court to exclude the blood test evidence used against his client, which weakened the prosecutor’s case. Such an exclusion gives the prosecution more incentive to offer a plea deal, or as was in this case, move the jury to acquit his client of his charges.

In alcohol related offenses, it is imperative to hire a defense attorney with experience with the exclusion of such forensic tests due to their unreliability. This type of cross examination requires more experience than the average attorney would have, as it requires the study of the operation and standards of the chemical tests performed in these types of cases.

A veteran of hundreds of successful jury trials, Jeffrey T. McCarty’s forceful and winning advocacy over 30 years of practice produces exemplary results. Read his article about the Michigan breathalyzer evidence problem.