If you are facing a charge of operating a vehicle impaired (OVI) based on a breath test, you may already feel that the machine’s result limits your options. A breathalyzer reading does not automatically mean the evidence is reliable or legally valid. As a Lancaster lawyer who can push for breathalyzer challenges, I examine whether the authorities collected, handled, and processed the test exactly as state law requires. One error can change the entire case.
You found me because you need an experienced OVI attorney who could analyze the science, the procedure, and the law. I answer all questions directly and thoroughly. You have a problem, and I focus on solving it through clear communication and detailed forensic review.
Ohio strictly regulates breath testing through Ohio Revised Code § 4511.19, which governs OVI offenses, and Ohio Rev. Code § 4511.191, which governs implied consent. The Ohio Administrative Code, including OAC 3701-53, controls the testing process itself and sets mandatory testing procedures. These rules determine who may administer the test, the calibration schedule, observation requirements, and record retention.
If law enforcement deviates from even one required step, the test result can become unreliable and subject to suppression. A breath test challenge by a Lancaster attorney requires a precise review of machine certifications, operator permits, maintenance logs, and observation periods. I review each of these technical components before advising you on how the defense may proceed.
Breath test evidence in court documents often seems conclusive. In practice, testing violations happen every day. A breath test defense strategy begins by identifying procedural and scientific weaknesses, which may include the following:
Breathalyzers do not measure impairment. They estimate blood alcohol concentration based on assumed conversion ratios that may not apply to your physiology. Medical issues, dental work, reflux conditions, and temperature variations all influence accuracy. When a breath test result becomes the centerpiece of the prosecution’s case in Lancaster, challenging its reliability becomes the most effective legal defense tool available.
My training at the National Criminal Defense College and my advanced education in forensics allow me to challenge scientific assumptions directly. Breathalyzer evidence rests on chemistry, mechanics, and regulatory compliance. I review instrument reliability studies, test batch records, gas solution documents, and foundational admissibility standards.
A breathalyzer legal defense strategy is not guesswork. Rather, it is a systematic review of whether the state complied with its burden of proof under the law. If the state cannot show strict compliance with OAC 3701-53, the court may exclude the test result. That exclusion alone often reshapes the entire prosecution theory.
You should not speak to law enforcement without legal counsel present. Statements made after arrest frequently become the strongest supporting evidence for the prosecution. This applies even if the breath test result appears straightforward.
Your silence is your protection. I personally handle communication, evidentiary challenges, suppression issues, and motion practice. The earlier legal preparation begins, the stronger your position when the defense challenges breath test evidence in court in Lancaster.
If your case involves a breathalyzer result, the machine’s reading does not decide your future. I challenge the reliability of testing, the regulatory compliance, and scientific assumptions. As a Lancaster breathalyzer challenge lawyer, I make the case that a piece of evidence does not have to be considered just because the prosecution introduced it.
Call Andrew H. Stevenson, Attorney at Law, LLC, today to discuss your breath test case directly. Let me review the facts of your case, explain the defense strategy, and begin preparation immediately.