DOCSLIB.ORG

Claims and Responses to Common Challenges and Defenses

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Claims and Responses to Common Challenges and Defenses Challenges and Defenses II Claims and Responses to Common Challenges and Defenses in Driving While Impaired Cases The National Traffic Law Center is a program of the National District Attorneys Association. This document was prepared under Cooperative Agreement Number DTNH22-05-H-05166 from the U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Points of view or opinions in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the Department of Transportation, NHTSA, or the National District Attorneys Association. TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements ...........................................................................................................iii Introduction ....................................................................................................................... v Confronting Defense Issues in Prescription and Over-the-Counter Drug DUIs ......... 1 The defendant is not guilty because he was using an over-the- counter or lawfully prescribed drug............................................................................... 1 The defendant was mistakenly or involuntarily intoxicated. ......................................... 2 The quantitative levels of the drug are below the therapeutic dose and therefore not capable of causing impairment. ............................................................... 3 The defendant was unconscious or cannot remember what happened due to the effects of Ambien and therefore not legally responsible for his actions. ...................... 4 Jurors may empathize with the defendant about the use of a legal drug. ...................... 6 Breath Testing Results: Defense Alternative Explanations .......................................... 8 Diabetes ......................................................................................................................... 8 Defendant has diabetes .......................................................................................... 11 GERD (Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease) ................................................................. 13 Defendant has GERD, which created an artificially high reading or inaccurate result on the breath-testing instrument. ................................................ 13 Challenges to Blood Draws and Test Results ................................................................ 17 The swab used to cleanse the skin prior to the blood draw contained alcohol and contaminated the sample. ........................................................ 17 The presence of clots in the blood sample artificially increased the reported alcohol concentration. ................................................................................... 18 i Challenges to Blood Draws and Test Results (cont.) Improper package and storage of the blood caused the development of yeast (Candida albican,) artificially increasing the reported alcohol concentration (fermentation). ..........................................................................19 The State has not demonstrated that the gray top blood tubes used to draw the blood contained the proper chemicals to ensure a valid analysis. ...............................20 Serum and plasma have higher alcohol contents than whole blood. Because BAC is measured in terms of whole blood, the serum and plasma results are misleading. .....................................................................................20 The blood testing instrument measured and reported something other than ethyl alcohol and this artificially increased the reported BAC. ............................................21 The tubes used to collect the blood were expired, so the results cannot be trusted. .........................................................................................................22 Arterial blood is a much better indicator of actual BAC levels when compared to venous blood. ..........................................................................................22 The gray top tubes used to collect the blood samples were not FDA-approved. Therefore, the jury and/or judge should not trust the results. ......................................23 Measurement Uncertainty ...............................................................................................24 The chemical test results without an accompanying uncertainty measurement value are not scientifically reliable. .............................................................................25 The bare chemical test result without a confidence interval misleads the jury. ...........26 Challenges to the Source Code of Breath Testing Instruments ...................................28 The defense needs the source code in order to be assured of the accuracy of the breath test instrument and its results. .................................................28 The defendant has a right to discovery of the source code and the prosecution must produce it. ........................................................................................30 Resources and References ...............................................................................................32 ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This guide was created by the National Traffic Law Center of the National District Attor- neys Association and is the result of a collaborative effort of the following traffic safety professionals: L. Beth Barnes, Arizona Traffic Safety Resource Prosecutor, Assistant City Prosecutor, Phoenix, Arizona Edward A. Berkovich, Utah Traffic Safety/Domestic Violence Resource Prosecutor Brian Chodrow, Program Analyst, Impaired Driving Division, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Daniel M. Fox, California Traffic Safety Resource Prosecutor Moses Garcia, Washington Traffic Safety Resource Prosecutor William Lemons, Minnesota Traffic Safety Resource Prosecutor Mark M. Neil, Senior Attorney, National Traffic Law Center of the National District At- torneys Association Jared Olson, Idaho Traffic Safety Resource Prosecutor R. Alexander Robinson, former Staff Attorney, National Traffic Law Center of the National District Attorneys Association Joanne E. Thomka, Program Director, National Traffic Law Center of the National District Attorneys Association iii iv INTRODUCTION DUI cases have become some of the most complex in the criminal justice system. As a result, defense challenges are being raised more frequently and are more procedural and scientific in nature. These challenges range from the initial law enforcement stop of the vehicle to the testing procedures used to determine alcohol concentration in blood, breath, and urine samples to possible alternative explanations for those results. This monograph was developed to assist prosecutors and law enforcement in understanding the nature of these challenges. It will assist prosecutors in formulating effective responses to these newer challenges and defenses and include drugged driving, alternative ex- planations to breath test results, blood draws and testing, scientific uncertainty, and computer source code discovery requests. The National Traffic Law Center previously published Overcoming Impaired Driv- ing Defenses, thanks to a contribution from a charitable foundation, discussing such de- fense challenges as invalid traffic stops, arrests and Miranda issues, as well as common trial tactics of attacking the investigation, such as driving observations, personal contact, field sobriety tests and breath testing. That monograph may be downloaded from the Na- tional District Attorneys Association Web site at www.ndaa.org. The terms DUI (driving under the influence), DWI (driving while intoxicated or impaired) and OUI (operating under the influence) are considered interchangeable for the purposes of this publication. v vi Confronting Defense Issues in Prescription or Over-the-Counter Drug DUIs When the topic of “drugged driving” comes up, most people think almost exclu- sively of the use of illicit or controlled substances by someone operating a motor vehicle. However, prescription or over-the-counter (OTC) drugs also impair a person’s ability to operate a motor vehicle in a safe and prudent manner. Both prescription and OTC drugs are known to cause mental and physical impairment, especially when multiple drugs are used in combination or drugs are mixed with alcohol. CLAIM: The defendant is not guilty because he was using an over-the-counter or lawfully prescribed drug. RESPONSE: Entitlement is not a legally recognized defense. An entitlement defense encompasses the mens rea of “I didn’t do anything wrong, or at least I didn’t know that I was doing anything wrong.” It amounts to the defendant offering a seemingly valid excuse for his behavior. An entitlement defense occurs when the defendant presents a valid prescription or OTC purchase to the jury as justification for the medications found in his system. In doing so, the defendant asserts to the jury that he has done nothing unlawful by consuming the medicine and driving. Dissected: the de- fendant focuses the jury’s attention on the reason for the impairment and not on his deci- sion to drive. He can justify the impairment but the prosecutor needs to point out that the defendant still can’t justify the decision to drive while impaired. How a defendant came to be impaired is not an element of proof in a DUI case. However, the prosecutor should make strategic and tactical efforts to satisfy a jury’s curi- osity of how impairment occurred. The prosecutor must also
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Current Trends and Indicators of Alcohol Problems in California
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. CURRENT TRENDS AND INDICATORS OF ALCOHOL PROBLEMS IN CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF ALCOHOL AND DRUG PROGRAMS DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATION DATA MANAGEMENT SERVICES BRANCH STATISTICS AND ANALYTICAL STUDIES SECTION & dmscc82:1aura.dms:081189:1g/aa INDICATORS OF ALCOHOL PROBLEMS DEPARTMENT OF ALCOHOL AND DRUG PROGRAMS DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATION DATA MANAGEMENT SERVICES BRANCH STATISTICS AND ANALYTICAL STUDIES SECTION 120265 U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Justice This document has been reproduced exactly as received from the person or organization originating it. Points of view or opinions stated in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official pOSition or policies of the National Institute of Justice. Permission to reproduce this copyrighted material has been granted by California Dept. of Alcohol and Drug Programs to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). Further reproduction outside of the NCJRS system requires permis­ sion of the copyright owner. FOREWORD As the use of alcohol and the problems related to alcohol abuse increase in our society, so does public concern. The socioeconomic costs (crime, treatment lost employment, reduced productivity, social programs) confronting California's citizens as a result of the problems related to alcohol abuse is conservatively estimated at more than $11 billion annually. This is a cost of over $400 for every man, woman, and child in California. As a result, citizen and parent groups, youth and student organizations, civic groups, law enforcement agencies, educators, health care providers, business leaders, and the community at large are joining together to battle this problem and its consequences to our citizens, especially our youth.
    [Show full text]
  • Sanctions for Drunk Driving Accidents Resulting in Serious Injuries And/Or Death
    Sanctions for Drunk Driving Accidents Resulting in Serious Injuries and/or Death State Statutory Citation Description of Penalty Alabama Ala. Code §§ 13A-6-20 & Serious Bodily Injury: Driving under the influence that result in the 13A-5-6(a)(2) serious bodily injury of another person is assault in the first degree, Ala. Code § 13A-6-4 which is a Class B felony. These felonies are punishable by no more than 20 years and no less than two years incarceration. Criminally Negligent Homicide: A person commits the crime of criminally negligent homicide by causing the death of another through criminally negligent conduct. If the death is caused while operating a motor vehicle while under the influence, the punishment is increased to a Class C felony, which is punishable by a prison term of no more than 10 years or less than 1 year and one day. Alaska Alaska Stat. §§ Homicide by Vehicle: Vehicular homicide can be second degree 11.41.110(a)(2), murder, manslaughter, or criminally negligent homicide, depending 11.41.120(a), & on the facts surrounding the death (see Puzewicz v. State, 856 P.2d 11.41.130(a) 1178, 1181 (Alaska App. 1993). Alaska Stat. Ann. § Second degree murder is an unclassified felony and shall be 12.55.125 (West) imprisoned for not less than 15 years nor more than 99 years Manslaughter is a class A felony and punishable by a sentence of not more than 20 years in prison. Criminally Negligent Homicide is a class B felony and punishable by a term of imprisonment of not more than 10 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Ending Drunk Driving with a Flash of Light Andrew Sullivan University of Richmond
    University of Richmond UR Scholarship Repository Law Student Publications School of Law 2015 Ending Drunk Driving with a Flash of Light Andrew Sullivan University of Richmond Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.richmond.edu/law-student-publications Part of the Food and Drug Law Commons, and the Transportation Law Commons Recommended Citation Andrew Sullivan, Ending Drunk Driving with a Flash of Light, 21 Rich. J.L. & Tech. 15 (2015). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law at UR Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Law Student Publications by an authorized administrator of UR Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Richmond Journal of Law & Technology Volume XXI, Issue 4 ENDING DRUNK DRIVING WITH A FLASH OF LIGHT Andrew Sullivan* Cite as: Andrew Sullivan, Ending Drunk Driving with a Flash of Light, 21 RICH. J.L. & TECH. 15 (2015), http://jolt.richmond.edu/v21i3/article15.pdf. I. INTRODUCTION [1] Drunk driving exacts an enormous toll on our society. Every year, alcohol-driven1 crashes kill over ten thousand people, injure hundreds of thousands more, and cost the national economy tens of billions of dollars.2 States largely have been left to combat this problem through their own criminal regimes. Among the methods used to combat drunk driving is mandating a person convicted of driving under the influence/driving while intoxicated3 install an ignition interlock device (“IID”) in her vehicle as a condition of restoring her driving privileges. Installing an IID prevents a person convicted of a DUI from starting her car if she has a certain amount * J.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Rules of the Alabama Department of Forensic Sciences Chapter 370-1-1 Chemical Test for Intoxication Table of Contents 370-1-1
    RULES OF THE ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF FORENSIC SCIENCES CHAPTER 370-1-1 CHEMICAL TEST FOR INTOXICATION TABLE OF CONTENTS 370-1-1-.01 Admissibility Rule for the Evidential Breath Alcohol Test Method 370-1-1-.03 Blood, Urine, and Other Bodily Substances 370-1-1-.04 Field Sobriety Screening Tests 370-1-1-.05 Field Sobriety Alcohol Screening Devices 370-1-1-.06 Field Sobriety Drug Screening Devices 370-1-1-.01 Admissibility Rule for the Evidential Breath Alcohol Test Method. (1) Purpose. This rule addresses the statutory elements required for the admissibility of evidence obtained from Breath Alcohol Testing Instruments. This rule contains the METHOD, as referred to by §32-5A-194 Code of Alabama, 1975 as amended, which insures and verifies that each individual Breath Alcohol Test is performed accurately and reliably. IN EVENT THAT ONE OF THESE REQUIREMENTS IS NOT FULFILLED, BREATH ALCOHOL TESTING EVIDENCE MAY STILL BE OFFERED THROUGH TRADITIONAL EVIDENTIARY PREDICATE as approved of in Ex parte Mayo, 652 So. 2d 201 (Ala. 1994). (2) Definitions and Abbreviations. (a) Draeger 7110 MKIII (i) Acceptable Breath Sample. For the purpose of this rule the subject must provide the Draeger Alcotest 7110 MKIII with a breath sample of sufficient volume and duration, as required by the software to be accepted for analysis. Software versions prior to and including version 3.24 require the subject to provide a minimum of 1.5 liters of breath, for a minimum of 4.5 seconds. Software versions 3.25 or later require the subject to provide a minimum of 1.3 liters of breath, for a minimum of 4.0 seconds.
    [Show full text]
  • 3 Effects of Alcohol Consumption
    Alcohol 2018 Alcohol CONTENTS 1 Overview _________________________________________________________________ 3 2 Prevalence and risks associated with alcohol consumption _________________________ 4 2.1 Alcohol consumption ___________________________________________________________ 4 2.2 Drinking and driving ____________________________________________________________ 6 2.3 The legal limit _______________________________________________________________ 10 2.4 Crashes and injuries ___________________________________________________________ 12 2.5 Characteristics of alcohol-impaired drivers ________________________________________ 18 3 Effects of alcohol consumption ______________________________________________ 19 3.1 Acute impairments due to alcohol consumption _____________________________________ 19 3.2 Chronic impairments due to prolonged alcohol consumption over time __________________ 20 3.3 Effects on driver capabilities ____________________________________________________ 20 4 Measures ________________________________________________________________ 23 4.1 Reducing the availability of alcohol ______________________________________________ 23 4.2 Separating drinking from driving _________________________________________________ 24 4.3 Designated driver programmes __________________________________________________ 27 4.4 Police enforcement ___________________________________________________________ 28 4.5 Education and information _____________________________________________________ 33 4.6 Summary of effective measures _________________________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • 6.14 Alcohol Use Disorders and Alcoholic Liver Disease
    6. Priority diseases and reasons for inclusion 6.14 Alcohol use disorders and alcoholic liver disease See Background Paper 6.14 (BP6_14Alcohol.pdf) Background The WHO estimates that alcohol is now the third highest risk factor for premature mortality, disability and loss of health worldwide.1 Between 2004 to 2006, alcohol use accounted for about 3.8% of all deaths (2.5 million) and about 4.5% (69.4 million) of Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALYS).2 Europe is the largest consumer of alcohol in the world and alcohol consumption in this region emerges as the third leading risk factor for disease and mortality.3 In European countries in 2004, an estimated one in seven male deaths (95 000) and one in 13 female deaths (over 25 000) in the 15 to 64 age group were due to alcohol-related causes.3 Alcohol is a causal factor in 60 types of diseases and injuries and a contributing factor in 200 others, and accounts for 20% to 50% of the prevalence of cirrhosis of the liver. Alcohol Use Disorders (AUD) account for a major part of neuropsychiatric disorders and contribute substantially to the global burden of disease. Alcohol dependence accounts for 71% of all alcohol-related deaths and for about 60% of social costs attributable to alcohol.4 The acute effects of alcohol consumption on the risk of both unintentional and intentional injuries also have a sizeable impact on the global burden of disease.2 Alcoholic liver disease (ALD) is the commonest cause of cirrhosis in the western world, and is currently one of the ten most common causes of death.5 Liver fibrosis caused by alcohol abuse and its end stage, cirrhosis, present enormous problems for health care worldwide.
    [Show full text]
  • Recommended Methods for the Identification and Analysis Of
    Vienna International Centre, P.O. Box 500, 1400 Vienna, Austria Tel: (+43-1) 26060-0, Fax: (+43-1) 26060-5866, www.unodc.org RECOMMENDED METHODS FOR THE IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS OF AMPHETAMINE, METHAMPHETAMINE AND THEIR RING-SUBSTITUTED ANALOGUES IN SEIZED MATERIALS (revised and updated) MANUAL FOR USE BY NATIONAL DRUG TESTING LABORATORIES Laboratory and Scientific Section United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime Vienna RECOMMENDED METHODS FOR THE IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS OF AMPHETAMINE, METHAMPHETAMINE AND THEIR RING-SUBSTITUTED ANALOGUES IN SEIZED MATERIALS (revised and updated) MANUAL FOR USE BY NATIONAL DRUG TESTING LABORATORIES UNITED NATIONS New York, 2006 Note Mention of company names and commercial products does not imply the endorse- ment of the United Nations. This publication has not been formally edited. ST/NAR/34 UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATION Sales No. E.06.XI.1 ISBN 92-1-148208-9 Acknowledgements UNODC’s Laboratory and Scientific Section wishes to express its thanks to the experts who participated in the Consultative Meeting on “The Review of Methods for the Identification and Analysis of Amphetamine-type Stimulants (ATS) and Their Ring-substituted Analogues in Seized Material” for their contribution to the contents of this manual. Ms. Rosa Alis Rodríguez, Laboratorio de Drogas y Sanidad de Baleares, Palma de Mallorca, Spain Dr. Hans Bergkvist, SKL—National Laboratory of Forensic Science, Linköping, Sweden Ms. Warank Boonchuay, Division of Narcotics Analysis, Department of Medical Sciences, Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand Dr. Rainer Dahlenburg, Bundeskriminalamt/KT34, Wiesbaden, Germany Mr. Adrian V. Kemmenoe, The Forensic Science Service, Birmingham Laboratory, Birmingham, United Kingdom Dr. Tohru Kishi, National Research Institute of Police Science, Chiba, Japan Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Organic Functional Group Analysis
    Experiment 1 1 Laboratory Experiments for GOB Chemistry ___________________________________________________________________________________________ I ORGANIC FUNCTIONAL GROUP ANALYSIS I. OBJECTIVES AND BACKGROUND This experiment will introduce you to some of the more common functional groups of organic chemistry. The functional group is that portion of the molecule that undergoes a structural change during a chemical reaction. The functional groups that will be studied in this experiment are carboxylic acid, amines aldehyde, ketone, alcohols and alkenes. You will learn chemical tests that will allow you to distinguish one functional group from another. You will use the chemical tests to identify the functionality of an unknown organic compound. In addition, you will use a water solubility test to determine whether your organic compound is of high or low formula weight. The chemical tests you will perform make up a sequence of experiments designed to determine the absence of or suggest the presence of particular functional groups. The complete sequence is shown in the flow diagram on page 8. This diagram can serve you in several ways: It is a summary of the procedure that you are to follow in classifying your unknown as one of the functional group types. It can order your thoughts as you read the discussion of each test, and help you to understand the significance of that test. It can enhance your appreciation for and enjoyment of this experiment. Your role is that of chemist and detective: you will employ this cleverly devised scheme to sleuth out the identity of your unknown's functionality. Experiment 1 2 Laboratory Experiments for GOB Chemistry ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Discussion of Chemical Tests 1.
    [Show full text]
  • World Journal of Gastroenterology
    World Journal of W J G Gastroenterology Submit a Manuscript: https://www.f6publishing.com World J Gastroenterol 2019 March 28; 25(12): 1445-1456 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v25.i12.1445 ISSN 1007-9327 (print) ISSN 2219-2840 (online) REVIEW Growing burden of alcoholic liver disease in China: A review Wen-Jun Wang, Peng Xiao, Hong-Qin Xu, Jun-Qi Niu, Yan-Hang Gao ORCID number: Wen-Jun Wang Wen-Jun Wang, Peng Xiao, Hong-Qin Xu, Jun-Qi Niu, Yan-Hang Gao, Department of Hepatology, (0000-0003-1302-694X); Peng Xiao First Hospital of Jilin University, Jilin University, Changchun 130021, Jilin Province, China (0000-0002-5570-1985); Hong-Qin Xu (0000-0002-7022-7732); Jun-Qi Corresponding author: Yan-Hang Gao, MD, PhD, Chief Doctor, Department of Hepatology, Niu (0000-0002-5187-7297); Yan- First Hospital of Jilin University, Jilin University, No. 71, Xinmin Street, Changchun 130021, Hang Gao (0000-0002-6836-0614). Jilin Province, China. [email protected] Telephone: +86-431-81875121 Author contributions: Gao YH and Fax: +86-431-81875106 Niu JQ designed the research; Wang WJ and Xiao P performed the data analyses; Gao YH and Wang WJ drafted the manuscript; Gao YH and Xu HQ revised the Abstract paper; All authors approved the Explosive economic growth and increasing social openness in China over the last final version. 30 years have significantly boosted alcohol consumption, and consequently, the Supported by the National Science incidence of alcoholic liver disease (ALD) in China has increased. Because the and Technology Major Project, No. epidemiologic and clinical features of ALD in the Chinese population may differ 2017ZX10202202 and No.
    [Show full text]
  • ADDICTIONS: Alcohol-Related Harm in the United States
    ADDICTIONS: Alcohol-related harm in the United States Posted: Wednesday, May 3, 2017 JoAnn Hummers When considering the impact of alcohol and other drugs on communities, one common response is “I only drink alcohol, but don’t use drugs!” or “It’s only beer.” A group called Alcohol Justice describes its mission as promoting “evidence-based public health policies and organiz[ing] campaigns with diverse communities and youth against the alcohol industry’s harmful practices.” Here is their description of the problem: ––– Globally, alcohol consumption causes an estimated 2.5 million deaths every year. Alcohol has been found the most harmful drug in terms of harm to both users and to other people. A 2013 study found alcohol caused nine times as many deaths annually as other drugs. Alcohol contributes to a wide range of negative societal and personal consequences, and causes more harm than any other drug in the U.S. Despite the alcohol industry’s claims, alcohol-related harm goes far beyond drunk driving or underage drinking. In the United States: • Alcohol is the third leading cause of preventable death. • Nine percent of all deaths were attributed to alcohol consumption in 2005. • Approximately 4,300 people under the legal drinking age of 21 die annually from injuries caused by drinking alcohol. Alcohol consumption accounts for approximately 88,000 deaths each year. • Alcohol use is associated with physical and sexual assault, unintended pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, violence, vandalism, crime, overdose, other substance use, and high-risk behavior. • Alcohol contributes to various illnesses such as hypertension, liver cirrhosis, chronic pancreatitis and cancers of the breast, esophagus, larynx, pancreas and liver.
    [Show full text]
  • NATIONAL COMMISSION AGAINST DRUNK DRIVING CONFERENCE on RECIDIVISM ATLANTA, GEORGIA Seprrember 16, 1986
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. BIPIA! ZIBOIRG IR OR BIPIA! OfflRDIBS BIPIA! NATIONAL COMMISSION AGAINST DRUNK DRIVING CONFERENCE ON RECIDIVISM 119586 U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Justice This document has been reproduced exactly as received from the person or organization originating It. Points of view or opinions stated in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the National Institute of Justice. Permission to reproduce this copyrighted material has been granted by Allstate Insurance Corngany C\R-SENT (Cor]2orate Re.l.at.~) 0(- 05- gO to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). Further reproduction outside of the NCJRS system requires permis­ ~ r~~ sion of the copyright owner. ~ Atlanta, Georgia Septernber16,1986 V\.. ....." National Commission Against Drunk Driving The National Commission Against Drunk Driving was established on January 1, 1984, as the successor to the Presidential Commission on Drunk Driving. Among the 30 recommendations made in its Final Report of December 1983, the Presidential Commission on Drunk Driving called for a non-governmental body to ensure a continuing focus on the national campaign against drunk driving. GovernorJohnA. Volpe ofMassachusetts served as its first chairman, as he had chaired the Presidential Commission. V,J. "Jim" Adduci is the present chairman with Lawrence H. vVilliford, vice chairman. The National Commission has held state hearings on the value of administrative license revocation; tracked state activities on key legislative measures; testified in support of the age 21 drinking laws; published model programs that have proven effective as educational/preventive tools; and serves as a clearinghouse on national efforts to counter drunk driving.
    [Show full text]
  • 510(K) SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE DETERMINATION DECISION SUMMARY ASSAY and INSTRUMENT COMBINATION TEMPLATE
    510(k) SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE DETERMINATION DECISION SUMMARY ASSAY AND INSTRUMENT COMBINATION TEMPLATE A. 510(k) Number: k180356 B. Purpose for Submission: New Device C. Measurand: Glucose, protein, leukocyte, nitrite and ketones in urine D. Type of Test: Qualitative and semi-quantitative urinalysis E. Applicant: Scanadu, Inc. F. Proprietary and Established Names: inui In-Home Urine Analysis Test System G. Regulatory Information: Name Regulation Product Device code class Urinary glucose (non-quantitative) test 21 CFR 862.1340 JIL II system Urinary protein or albumin (non- 21 CFR 862.1645 JIR I quantitative) test system Leukocyte peroxidase test 21 CFR 864.7675 LJX I Nitrite (non-quantitative) test system 21 CFR 862.1510 JMT I Ketones (non-quantitative) test system 21 CFR 862.1435 JIN I 2. Panel: Chemistry (75), Hematology (81) 1 H. Intended Use: 1. Intended use(s): See indications for use statement below. 2. Indication(s) for use: The inui In-Home Urine Analysis Test System consists of the inui In-Home Urine Analysis Device and the inui Urine Analysis Mobile Application. The inui In-Home Urine Analysis Test System is intended for detecting the following parameters in urine: protein, glucose, leukocytes, nitrites, and ketones. The test results provide information regarding the status of urinary tract infections (UTI), proteinuria, glucosuria, and ketonuria. These results can be used as an aid for monitoring kidney functions, metabolic disorders (e.g. diabetes mellitus), and can be used in the screening for urinary tract infections (UTI). The inui In-Home Urine Analysis Device is intended for use as a Prescription Home use device.
    [Show full text]