Reasons to Consider Challenging Breath or Blood Test Results
Challenging breath or blood tests can be warranted for many reasons, including device malfunction, improper administration, contamination, or lab errors. If any element of the testing chain appears inconsistent or incomplete, the test results may be less reliable than they appear. Other reasons include discrepancies in officer reports, missing calibration or maintenance logs, or gaps in chain-of-custody documentation. Clients in Lynchburg should consider a challenge when available records or circumstances raise legitimate questions about the accuracy and integrity of BAC evidence being used against them.
Beyond device or lab issues, personal factors such as medical conditions, prescription medications, or timing of consumption relative to testing can affect results. Challenging tests also makes sense when administrative consequences like license suspension threaten employment or daily life. Even if suppression is not guaranteed, identifying and arguing testing weaknesses often improves negotiation outcomes. For many Lynchburg residents charged with DUI, a thoughtful challenge to breath or blood evidence offers the best path to reducing penalties, preserving driving privileges, and protecting long-term consequences on records and reputation.
Common Situations That Lead to Breath or Blood Test Challenges
Typical circumstances prompting a challenge include missing or inconsistent calibration logs for breath devices, failure to follow observation period requirements, improperly collected or labeled blood samples, and laboratory reporting errors. Other triggers include late or delayed testing that may not reflect actual impairment at the time of driving, or medical conditions that affect blood alcohol readings. In Lynchburg, attorneys also look for documentation gaps, poorly maintained equipment, or breakdowns in chain of custody, all of which can form the basis for motions to suppress or other defenses.
Calibration and Maintenance Errors
Calibration and maintenance errors with breath-testing instruments are common grounds for challenge. If calibration records show missed checks or out-of-tolerance results that were not addressed, the reliability of subsequent tests can be questioned. Similarly, improper maintenance or failure to follow manufacturer guidelines can lead to inaccurate readings. In Lynchburg cases, attorneys will request device logs, maintenance records, and repair histories to determine whether the machine was functioning properly at the time of testing and whether the reported results should be afforded full evidentiary weight.
Observation and Administration Issues
Failures to follow required observation periods or proper administration procedures often provide meaningful grounds for contesting breath test results. If an officer did not observe a suspect for the mandated time or failed to record key steps in the testing process, the integrity of the sample may be compromised. For blood testing, improper collection techniques or inadequate documentation of who handled the sample can similarly undermine results. Attorneys in Lynchburg review all procedural details to identify these types of deficiencies and present them to the court as part of a suppression or impeachment strategy.
Laboratory Handling and Reporting Problems
Issues in laboratory handling and reporting, such as mislabeled samples, improper storage temperatures, or transcription errors in results, can all affect the validity of blood test evidence. Quality control failures or inconsistencies between lab reports and original records may indicate unreliable processes. In DeSoto County and Lynchburg cases, counsel often requests lab SOPs, quality assurance records, and proficiency testing results to evaluate whether the laboratory adhered to accepted standards. Demonstrating lab shortcomings can support motions to exclude or diminish the probative value of blood test results.
