DUI Breath Test Defense Lawyer in Tempe, AZ Testing Process and Evidence Review

Five things established before a reading counts

A.R.S. 28-1323(A) lists them. The test used a quantitative breath testing device approved by the Department of Health Services or the Department of Public Safety. The operator held a valid permit to run that device. Duplicate tests were administered with results within 0.02 alcohol concentration of each other, or an operator watched the person for twenty minutes immediately before the test. The operator followed an approved operational checklist. And the device was in proper operating condition. Subsection (B) then states that compliance with that list is the only requirement for admission, which cuts both ways.

The duplicate rule and the twenty minutes

Two of those requirements are alternatives to each other, and that is where the paperwork gets interesting. Either the pair of readings agrees within 0.02, or an operator observed the subject for a full twenty minutes beforehand. The observation period exists because material in the mouth can affect a breath sample, so the honest question is not whether the officer wrote a time down but whether the sequence in the report and the video supports it. Operator testimony is what establishes that the checklist was followed, which makes the checklist and the timeline worth reading side by side.

Calibration records bracket your test, and they are public

Records of periodic maintenance showing the device was working are admissible as prima facie evidence that it was working when you blew. The statute names one qualifying type: calibration checks run with a standard alcohol concentration solution bracketing the duplicate breath tests. It then says outright that those records are public records, and section 28-1327 records are admissible as well. Requesting them early is ordinary practice, not an accusation. One limit deserves stating plainly: not being able to obtain the manufacturer's schematics and software does not affect admissibility under subsection (C).

The two-hour clause and the lines that follow it

The alcohol-count statutes measure concentration within two hours of driving or being in actual physical control, from alcohol consumed before or while driving. Section 28-1382 then draws two lines. From 0.15 to below 0.20 a first conviction carries not less than thirty consecutive days in jail. At 0.20 or more it is not less than forty-five consecutive days. The judge may suspend all but nine days in the lower band, or all but fourteen in the upper one, only if the person equips every vehicle driven with a certified ignition interlock device for twelve months. The device requirement itself runs twelve months in the lower band and eighteen months at 0.20 or above.

Blood leaves a different trail than breath

If blood was drawn under 28-1321, only a physician, a registered nurse or another qualified person may take it, and the statute says the drawer's qualifications and the method used are not foundational prerequisites for admitting the result. A separate provision matters after a crash: when a sample is taken from someone for any reason and an officer has probable cause on a 28-1381 violation, a portion sufficient for analysis must be provided on request. You also have a right to a reasonable opportunity to arrange an independent test by a physician, nurse or other qualified person of your own choosing, though failing to get one does not exclude the state's result.

Drug allegations run through evaluators, not only instruments

Where the claim is drugs rather than alcohol, the record often includes a drug recognition evaluation. The state's highway safety office counted 1,875 enforcement evaluations in 2024 against 1,420 in 2023, a 32.5 percent increase, with 304 certified evaluators and 78 instructors spread across 58 agencies. Its roster lists five named evaluators at the university police department in this city and credits the city police department with 18 evaluations. If the arrest involved one, there is a structured form behind the conclusion, and refusal itself is admissible as a question of fact for the trier of fact.

Write down what only you can still remember

The record you can protect is the timeline. Note when the last drink was finished, what and when you ate, every prescription and over-the-counter medication, dental work, reflux, injuries, and how long you sat in the patrol car before anyone produced a mouthpiece. Add the roadside conditions: traffic noise on Apache Boulevard, a slanted shoulder off Rural Road, temperature, footwear, lighting. Field instructions given quickly at night are hard to reconstruct months later from memory, and video does not always capture what standing on that surface was like.

What a records-heavy case does to a fee

The state's ethical rules do not permit a defense fee in a criminal matter to depend on the outcome, and the basis for the fee has to be set out in writing. Contesting a reading is the part that adds hours, because it means gathering maintenance and calibration records, operator permits, checklists and video, and often paying an independent analyst. That is scope, and scope is what a written agreement should describe.