American Judges Association Annual Conference New …amjudges.org/conferences/materials/Celeste...

American Judges Association

Annual Conference

New Orleans, Louisiana

October 3, 2012

Hon. Mary A. Celeste


OVERVIEW The Problem

Current Technology

Pros and Cons Types of Technology/Studies

Street Technology

Technology on the Horizon


THE PROBLEM

• Alcohol & Other Drugs • Cost of Incarceration • Cost of Monitoring

• Continued Driving (50 to 75 percent of convicted drunk drivers continue to drive on a suspended license)

• Recidivism


1.4 million DUI

arrests every year

Drinking proceeds

acts of DV abuse in

up to 50% of cases

Jails and prisons are

overcrowded

The system is

overwhelmed

Recidivism rates

remain unchanged

The hardcore drunk

driver (HCDD)

persists

Traditional methods

have not produced

better results


U.S. Corrections Summary

Alcohol-related offenses:

2,804,595

(20% of total arrests)

DUI

Underage Drinking

Domestic Violence

Alcohol-related offenders: 2,737,044

(37% of total corrections)

Probation Parole

Prison Jail

Correctional Supervision

Annual Arrests

Source: FBI US Crime Stats - 2010

7.2 million

supervised


ALCOHOL & OTHER DRUGS


Hardcore Drunk Drivers

• Conservative estimates show DUI offenders have driven drunk at least 80 times before they are arrested.

• Often drive with a high

BAC of 0.15+

• Incur repeated DUI arrests

• Are highly resistant to

behavioral change

• Are 385x more likely to be

involved a fatal crash than

non-drinking drivers

Sources: Century Council, National Highway Traffic Safety Association (NHSTA), Traffic Injury Research Foundation (TIRF)


Hardcore Drunk Driver Profile

• Often drive with a high

BAC of 0.15+

• Incur repeated DUI arrests

• Are highly resistant to

behavioral change

• Are 385x more likely to be

involved a fatal crash than

non-drinking drivers

Sources: Century Council, National Highway Traffic Safety Association (NHSTA), Traffic Injury Research Foundation (TIRF)

• Only 1% of drivers on weekend nights whose BACs exceed 0.15, yet are involved in 50% of all fatal crashes at that time

Involved in 70% of overall alcohol-related fatalities

9x more likely to have had a prior conviction in the past 3 years when involved in a fatal crash Hon. Mary A. Celeste

University of Maryland Shock Trauma Center 2005 Study Hon. Mary A. Celeste

HOT OFF THE PRESS

More Than Half of Fatal Car Crashes Involve Alcohol or Drugs

September 7, 2012, Journal Addiction New Study shows 57% of fatal car crashes involve a driver who tested

positive for alcohol or drugs Hon. Mary A. Celeste

The Drug Problem Increased Prescriptions Use and Abuse

Aging Population

Illegal & Designer Drugs

Legalized Medical Marijuana/Legalized Marijuana

Lack of Reporting/Data

Difficulty in Detection/Testing

Difficulty in Prosecutions


Increased and Abuse of Rx

1st time users of Rx drugs for non-medical use: 1980’s <0.5 million per year 1998 1.6 million 2000 >2 million per year 2006 6.3 million 2008 7 million

Rx drug abuse accounts for almost 30% of the overall drug

problem in the U.S.


Elderly abuse Rx drugs three times as frequently as the general population. Elderly consume 25% of all Rx medications taken in U.S.

Aging Population

Source: Ondus, et al., 1999

Aging Population

2009 AAA Study revealed that 78% of 55 and older drivers surveyed are taking more than one Rx medication and only 28% knew the impact the drugs could have on their ability to drive.


Prevalence of Drugged Driving 2011

20% of crashes in the U.S. are caused by drugged driving

25% of drivers who died in a crash were positive for illicit drugs

6,761 deaths and 440,000 injuries

Most common were marijuana (26.9%) and stimulants (cocaine-11.6% and amphetamines 5.6%)


Designer Drugs/New Drug Use

1. Bath Salts

2. Spice, K-2, Black Momba

3. Salvia

4. Adderall, Smiles (Teenagers/Young Adults)


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Salvia_divinorum_-_Herba_de_Maria.jpg

Incarceration

COST OF INCARCERATION


Cost of Incarceration

Budget for FYR 2011 is $168.8 million / 9.2% of general

fund budget

DOC provides service to 13,000 adults and 170

juvenile offenders

80% of offenders are supervised in community

65% are on probation and parole

Recidivism rate of 37.6% after three years

Males 40.4% vs. Female 27.1%, average age is 38.6

www.cor.mt.gov/facts/ Hon. Mary A. Celeste

Cost of Incarceration

www.cor.mt.gov/facts/


THE CORRECTIONS COMPONENT

FOR:

Smart

Supervision

Behavioral Risk

Monitoring Intensity

Cost to Monitor

BALANCING:


Integrated Supervision

Dynamically adjustable mix of continuous,

scheduled, and random testing


Ignition Interlock Ignition Interlock With Camera

Point-in-time Testing/Random Testing

Urine Testing/EtG(s)/Saliva Sticks

Continuous Monitoring/Transdermal

Monitor Connect

Current Technology


Ignition Interlock


Test

BAC = 0 Ignition

BAC <= 0.02

Warn

BAC > 0.02 Interlock

Running Retest

How Does It Work?


Ignition Interlock: The Basics

An alcohol interlock is a breath-testing device attached to a car’s starter. It prevents the car from being started when a pre-set level of alcohol is detected in the breath sample presumably provided by the driver of the vehicle.


Breath Alcohol Ignition Interlock Devices

• As of July 2011, there are approximately 249,000 interlocks in use in the United States.

Ignition Interlock devices separate the drunk driver from the vehicle

NHTSA approved model specification adopted in 1992 / device must prevent the car from starting 90% of the time if the BAC <.01g/dL greater than the preset limit *.02 g/dL

The devices use an electrochemical fuel cell to detect the presence of alcohol

There is a retest period if initial test indicates presence of alcohol over device set limit

Device will trigger alarm (lights, horn) if running retest is failed


• The running retest feature ensures that a driver remains sober while driving.

• It requires random and repeated breath samples while the vehicle is in use.

• A breath sample above the pre-set limit will result in a warning for the driver to pull over and stop driving.

• The interlock will not shut off a running engine.

Running Retest


FC100 Ignition Interlock With

Camera The FC100 Ignition Interlock is interfaced with

a target-tracking camera system

Does not allow a person to attempt to start the vehicle until positive identification is

confirmed by recording an image of the person sitting in the driver’s seat

Wireless With CameraDaily alcohol consumption monitoring and reporting

Real-time reporting of violations and vehicle location.


http://www.lifesafer.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/LifeSafer-Ignition-Interlock-Wireless.gif





START SMART INTERLOCK/CAMERA

•Interlock combined with the Photo ID camera module •Approximately 1 cubic inch box that is mounted to the inside of the driver's side windshield, about halfway up from the dash. •The device captures a picture of the breath test subject at the time that the subject is taking the test. •The unit stores the picture electronically and it date and time stamps in combination with the interlock unit's logger.


START SMART IN HOME MONITORING WITH CAMERA

•This is an alcohol specific fuel cell based device with an affordable price point, which is the same price as an interlock device.

•Programmable testing times can require tests at specific times of the day or can accept a test any time user desires.

•All you need is an electrical outlet; no phone line required. Built-in microchip records all test results (including missed tests), disconnections, time and date of breath tests, and photos of the client.

IN-HOM


Cost Considerations for Ignition Interlock Devices

Device Approximate Pricing

Installation Fee $50 - $100 one time fee

Daily Fee $2.00 - $4.00 per day

Monthly Download Fee $10 - 25 per download

Lockout Fee $25.00 - $50 may include mileage

Insurance $250.00 deductible / $5.00 per month

Removal Fee / Vehicle Change Fee $35.00 removal / $100.00 change fee


Ignition Interlock Programs

Reduction in DWI Recidivism – Research indicates average

reductions of 64% for those offenders who have device installed in

vehicle (1st time offenders to repeat offenders)

Eligible for legal driving status through provisional permit or full

restoration of licensure

Predictor of future DWI behavior: Correlation between higher rates

of failed tests and post Interlock removal recidivism

General positive approval of Interlock device from offenders

Policy is being driven by NHTSA, MADD and State DOT


Interlock Program Considerations

Self selection into program: When offenders are given a choice they

chose to drive on a suspended license. *Estimates show that 2/3 of

offenders chose not to have BAIID device installed

Research shows that recidivism rates revert to pre-device installation

once device is removed: 10+ studies confirm this which is driving

further policy consideration

Program considerations: conflict between role of MDV and courts

Reporting limitations: 30 – 60 day downloads to DMV, Interlock

industry is pushing “behavioral change / learning curve” to 5+ lockouts

would be trigger for reporting

Practical limitations: not mandatory, every vehicle??, motorcycles, no

car waiver, no integrated reporting platform for vendors, cold weather

issues, false positives, indigent funding


16 states and a California pilot program (covering a population of over 13 million) have laws requiring ignition interlocks for all first-time convicted drunk drivers.


•Numerous studies show substantial reductions in DWI recidivism when interlocks are actually on the vehicle (Vizina 2002 Tippets and VOAS 1997 Beck et. Al. 1989).

•According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), interlocks are effective in saving lives and reducing drunk driving repeat offenses by 67 percent

Ignition Interlock Pros


Case Studies of Ignition Interlock Program NHTSA April 2012

Points of Consideration:

•Program Strengths (support for stronger legislation, more efficient processes to monitor and supervise, developing & nurturing stakeholders)

•Suggestions for Interlock Program Developers (developing legislation, designing programs, implementing and managing programs, ) •Interlock Program Areas for Improvement (provide for more interlock device oversight, perform routine and formal program evaluations, explore the role of interlocks in the broader context of highway safety, develop programs to combine administrative and judicial strengths more effectively-i.e. move programs away from punishment model toward behavior modiication


Ignition Interlock Cons

Most interlock programs are run through Secretary of State / Department of Motor Vehicle offices

No means of ensuring interlock compliance

As few as 22% of offenders ordered to install interlocks actually comply DeYoung, 2002


Conclusion:

Ignition Interlock Devices are an important tool to be used by the court when dealing with alcoholic drivers when used as part of a more comprehensive approach. Ignition Interlock Devices, used alone will not provide a long-term solution to the issues created by alcoholic drivers.


And Further More …

If nothing is done but placing the offender on an interlock, the recidivism rates of program participants eventually return to levels comparable to offenders who did not participate in the interlock program

Robertson, Vavlern & Simpson, (2006)


People convicted of driving under the influence of prescription or illegal drugs must have an ignition interlock installed on their vehicles as required by New Mexico’s drunken driving law, although the devices don’t detect the use of drugs, the state Court of Appeals has ruled.

The court’s precedent-setting ruling overturned a decision last year by a district judge who determined that the ignition interlock requirement was unconstitutional against drug impaired drivers.

“It’s true that we know that an ignition interlock doesn’t detect drug use, but we also know a lot of times there’s dual use. It’s not just drugs people are using. Sometimes it’s alcohol with drugs,” Linda Atkinson, executive director of the DWI Resource Center said .

,

Court Orders Interlocks for Drug-Impaired Drivers

HOT OFF THE PRESS


National Center for DWI Courts

Ignition Interlock Device 10 Guidelines 1. Participants must follow the law. When legally allowed,

participants should drive in an ignition interlock equipped vehicle.

2. DWI court team members need to understand state drivers license administrative law and procedure.

3. DWI court team members need to understand the devices available in their state.

4. Ignition interlock devices can be used to help monitor a participant’s alcohol uses.

5. Use photo identification ignition interlock devices to provide proof positive of who provided the breath sample. Hon. Mary A. Celeste

Guidelines Cont’d

6. Participants must follow the law. When legally allowed, participants should drive in an ignition interlock equipped vehicle.

7. Incentives and sanctions are important in a DWI court ignition interlock program.

8. Indigence and program costs should be reviewed when using ignition interlocks.

9. Repeat DWI offenders are a dangerous target population keeping the community informed of this program is crucial.

10. DWI courts must provide clear written policy/procedures for the ignition interlock program.


Interlock Incentives A national surface-transportation law passed this year that takes effect

Oct. 1 will give states extra highway money if they have interlock laws for convicted drunk drivers. In 2010, 10,228 people died in the U.S. in alcohol-related accidents, meaning there was one such death every 51 minutes, according to NHTSA.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has estimated about 7,000 lives could be saved annually in the U.S. if no one drove with a blood-alcohol content higher than .08.

The American Beverage Institute, a Washington-based group representing beverage suppliers and restaurant chains, opposes interlock laws, saying they could punish patrons who are barely over the legal limit or instill fear into potential purchasers of alcoholic beverages.


Point-in-Time Testing Random Alcohol Monitoring


Traditional Point-in-Time Testing

Breath test is snapshot of individual’s BAC at that particular moment

in time

Alcohol test is either supervised or unsupervised / remote

Devices use industry standard fuel cell which are calibrated but

not evidential level

Results are observed or stored and recorded and

transmitted via phone, cellular, or serviced via

monthly downloads

Photos or voice can be used to detect tampers


Traditional Point-in-Time Testing

Random testing has limitations

Offender dependent

Participation in testing process creates opportunity

to manipulate test

Offender goes to device / device does not go

with offender

Test results and notification can be delayed

Drinking around testing windows is possible

Reporting is not as sophisticated / limited research


Point in time testing – Testing Schedule

Breathalyzer

test

7 AM

Offender starts

drinking

6 PM

Breathalyzer

test

5 PM

Offender peaks

0.095

Offender is sober

6 AM

Breathalyzer

test

7 AM

Random tests miss most drinking events.

Offenders can drink around random breathalyzer tests.

Alcohol metabolizes quickly:


Cost Considerations for Random Testing

Breath Testing Modality Approximate Pricing

In Office / Call in Colors / On Demand Free / $1.00 - $2.00 per test

Montana 24x7 Sobriety Program $2.00 per test / $4.00 per day

MEMS3000 / MEMS3000 Cellular $4.00 - $12.00 per day

BI Sobrietor $3.75 - $10.00 per day

Smart Start InHom Unit / InHom Cellular

$5.00 - $8.00 per day

ATS500 – Kiosk Technology $3.00 per test

Install / Download / Removal Fee $25 / $10 / $25 (varies by program) Hon. Mary A. Celeste

Alcohol Urine Testing / EtG and EtGS Drug Urine/Saliva Drug Test Strips


Alcohol and Urine Testing EtG

Marketed as 80 hours of detection window

Varying levels of sensitivity 100ng / 250ng / 500ng / 1000ng

Will test for other drugs

Use of a EtG consent form

Varying reporting options

Urine EtG not a quantitative measure of

alcohol use (i.e., impossible to predict how

much was consumedby urine EtG value)


“Judge, I swear that I wasn’t drinking!”


Alcohol and Urine Testing – EtG

Things that can increase or decrease EtG production due to changing enzyme

systems

Genetics -

Chronic alcohol use - until - liver failure

Foods – grapefruit juice , greens

Medications – erythromycin , St John’s Wart (and many others)

Pregnancy

Diseases – Gilbert’s Syndrome, others (5% of population), (and many others)


Alcohol and Urine Testing - EtG The higher the EtG level, the more likely due to drinking

No clear line identified so far

Guessing at the number that might distinguish between drinking and incidental exposure for years

Fact is, we don’t know the number

Sources of Incidental Exposure

Foods

Deserts

Cooking sherry and wine vinegar, flambé desserts

Vanilla extract (especially if used in large amounts, e.g. in drinks)

Hygiene Products

Mouthwash (Examples)

Listerine Original - 26.9%; Listerine Fresh Burst - 21.6%; Scope - 14.3%


2007 SAMHSA Advisory cautions monitoring

organizations and staff in criminal justice settings that

EtG urine test for alcohol consumption is "scientifically

unsupportable“ and “inappropriate” as the sole basis

for legal or disciplinary action.

May 2012 SAMHSA Revised Advisory provides

“affirmation for EtG/EtS testing as an effective

treatment tool.” It is “an accurate and reliable approach

to alcohol abstinence monitoring…”


http://www.kap.samhsa.gov/products/manuals/advisory

http://www.kap.samhsa.gov/products/manuals/advisory

Cost Considerations for Etg and Ets Testing

ETG / ETS Testing Approximate Pricing

In Office / Call in Colors / On Demand

Per Test $8.00 - $25.00

Per lab confirmation $35.00 - $50.00


Saliva/Urine Test Strips/Swabs


Continuous Alcohol Monitoring

SCRAM /TAD


Continuous Alcohol Monitoring The same function is served by another device that can

detect alcohol in the system via sweat on the skin.

This ankle bracelet, issued as a result of a court's decision, will feature a transdermal alcohol sensor that can detect and transmit information about the wearer to a remote sensor.

This and other passive alcohol sensors could be used much like the ignition interlock system: to help prevent repeat DUI offenders from making the same mistakes again without the knowledge being passed to officials.


SCRAMx – The Industry Leader

Controlled

Sample Delivery

Only court-accepted way to determine the

difference between ingested and environmental

alcohol

Draeger Fuel Cell Most reliable and commercially used fuel cell on

the market today

Single Source

Admissibility No secondary test required to stand up in court

Manual Data Analysis Designed to eliminate false positive alerts

AMS-Supported

in Court

No other company fully stands behind their

product’s results in court

Peer-reviewed and

Scientifically

Accepted

SCRAMx has been proven to be the most reliable

and effective tool to continuously monitor for

alcohol


SCRAMx: Two Technologies/One Device

CAM House Arrest DUAL-FUNCTION DEVICE

Fully integrated offender

enrollment, scheduling,

monitoring, and reporting

No redundant set-ups per

auto-consolidation of CAM

and house arrest clients

Daily presence / absence

reporting

Enhanced delivery options

for daily summary reporting

Multiple and immediate

alert-notification options

24/7 automated alcohol detection

Distinguishes ingested alcohol

from environmental alcohol

Anti-tamper technology

Court validation and backing

by manufacturer in court

Exception-based reporting

to flag high-risk offenders

Evidence-based assessment, promotes

better outcomes and lower recidivism

(NCSC, 2009)


Behavioral Effect

**55% fail one or more scheduled breath tests – SD 24/7 Sobriety Program, Office of AG, 7/2011 Presentation

***71% “blow fails” while Interlock is installed – Traffic Injury Research Foundation, 9/2010 Publication

SCRAMx (alcohol + house arrest)

SCRAMx (alcohol only)

2x Daily Breath (South Dakota)

Ignition Interlock

85.6%

76.7%

55%**

0% 50% 100%

29%***


Alcohol Monitoring System Lifetime Stats

from 12/1/2002 through 3/25/2012

Overall CAM Only CAM + RF

Overview # % # % # %

Total Clients Monitored 222,031 211,992 95.5 % 10,039 4.5 %

Clients Currently on SCRAMx 14,743 13,190 89.5 % 1,553 10.5 %

Total Readings 847,383,429 814,382,736 96.1 % 33,000,693 3.9 %

Total Monitored Days 20,579,091 19,916,376 96.8 % 662,715 3.2 %

Compliance

Clients Completed 207,288 198,802 8,486

Compliant 158,965 76.7 % 151,736 76.3 % 7,229 85.2 %

Non Compliant 48,323 23.3 % 47,066 23.7 % 1,257 14.8 %

Confirmed Violations Overall

0 158,965 76.7 % 151,736 76.3 % 7,229 85.2 %

1 - 2 32,945 15.9 % 31,944 16.1 % 1,001 11.8 %

3 + 15,378 7.4 % 15,122 7.6 % 256 3.0 %

Breakdown of Confirmed Violations

Drinking Only 7,691 3.7 % 7,443 3.7 % 248 2.9 %

Tampering Only 30,255 14.6 % 29,439 14.8 % 816 9.6 %

Both Drinking and Tampering 10,377 5.0 % 10,184 5.1 % 193 2.3 %

Overall Averages

Avg. Days on Program 91 92 64

Avg. Days on Program (Compliant) 80 81 58

Avg. Days on Program (Non Compliant) 127 128 98

Avg. Daily Non Compliance 0.8 0.8 128.0

Avg. Days to First Situation

53 53 44


PROS

89% felt SCRAMx helped them to stop drinking

88% would recommend SCRAMx to others with alcohol problems

80% paid their court fees and fines while on SCRAMx

$13.05 is the average daily dollar amount spent on alcohol before SCRAMx

SCRAMx Exit Survey Results indicate:

NCSC Study: Offenders with 90 days on SCRAM had a

recidivism rate half that of those who wore the bracelet for

less than 90 days or not at all Recidivism rate dropped: 45%

for hardcore DWI offenders (2+ convictions)


http://www.ncsconline.org/

September 2012 NHTSA Report Tansdermal Monitoring Case Studies

Six States (Co., Mo. Neb., N.Y., N.D., Wi.)

SCRAM used in 1,764 Courts in 46 States

“Appears to be beneficial to courts, probation and parole in monitoring alcohol”

1.4% offenders who completed SCRAM had a confirmed drinking event 16.9% had tamper volations

More costly than Interlock ($5-$12 day vs. $2.25-$2.75 day).

Concerns over low-level drinking needing more investigation

NHTSA is currently conducting the SCRAMx recidivism study, slated for release in mid-2013, which will take a broad range look at recidivism data for offenders in Neb, S.D. Wi.

HOT OFF THE PRESS


Web and Phone Based Collection of Supervision Services

Automated appointment reminders,

On-line and phone offender reporting,

Offender on demand access to information including agency

forms and documents, and networking of social service agencies,

Offenders can answer agency configurable questions, update their address and employment information, and send and receive messages from their case managers.


Monitor Connect Pros Allow agencies to better manage larger caseload levels while

still maintaining offender accountability.

Manage larger caseloads with less effort,

Immediate positive reinforcement for Offender

Reallocate supervision resources to higher risk caseloads and actually reduce costs.

Offender access and flexibility.


Monitor Connect Cons

Additional Cost to Offender ($8 mo.)

Offender must have the necessary technology

No face to face interaction

Cost to purchase case management system

IT Interfacing cost


Balancing Cost vs. Risk Case Study Montana

Level of Behavioral Risk Cost per Day Tools Available

HIGH MODERATE LOW

Jail

Injectable

SCRAMx

SCRAM

Biomarkers

Supervised 2x Day

Random BA

Ignition Interlock

$55 – $75

$33

$11

$10

$8 – $10

$4 – $8

$2 - $4

$2.50 – $3


TECHNOLOGY ON THE HORIZON Laser Technology to Detect Drugs

DADDS

Noninvasive Alcohol Measurement System

PBT to Detect Narcotics

Alcohol-Sensing flashlights

Portable Intoxilyzer 8000

Fingerprint Activation / Motor Skills Testing


Laser Technology to Detect Drugs

Within the next two years, a powerful and invisible new technology will be deployed by the U.S. government that can instantly scan and identify every molecule on your body or person: the cocaine residue on your dollar bills, prescription drugs in your purse, marijuana in your pocket


Laser Technology to Detect Drugs

The scanner is called the Picosecond Programmable Laser. The device works by blasting its target with lasers which vibrate molecules that are then read by the machine that determine what substances a person has been exposed to.

It's not limited to marijuana, this device can detect and catalog your use of any recreational drugs, including cocaine, heroin, ecstasy or anything.


DADDS


DADDS Similar to the alcohol ignition

interlock systems however it would be sleeker and less obtrusive

Best methods because they would not add extra steps and sober drivers would be able to hit the road as usual

Technology would not be mandated, but would be optional for manufacturers to include in the future Hon. Mary A. Celeste

DADDS The research is funded by $10 million from both NHTSA

and the Automotive Coalition for Traffic Safety.

Researchers at QinetiQ North America, a lab in Waltham, Mass. is developing the technology,

DADSS detects blood alcohol content in drivers and prevents alcohol-impaired drivers from operating their vehicles. This technology is designed to be less intrusive and less complicated than current ignition interlock systems.


DADDS began in 2008 and is a five-year, $10 million

cooperative research effort of DOT’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Automotive Coalition for Traffic Safety (ACTS), representing the nation's leading automakers.

Developing advanced alcohol detection technology through DADSS is one of the major elements of Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD)'s Campaign to Eliminate Drunk Driving.

In two years, research will move out of the laboratory and onto the road, when a drivable test vehicle is expected to be ready.


Noninvasive Alcohol with Identity Verification


n 100% Noninvasive – no use of bodily fluids

n Passive contact (touch-based)

n Employs near-infrared (NIR) spectroscopy

n Direct, quantitative, and contemporaneous measurement of alcohol concentration

n Accurate results

n Biometric identity verification inherent in measurement

Noninvasive alcohol measurement system

Performance demonstrated using working prototypes in numerous human studies

Street Technology

Alcohol-Sensing flashlights

• PBT to Detect Narcotics

Portable Intoxilyzer 8000



Alcohol-Sensing Flashlights Similar to the ordinary lights that officers already carry,

contain sensors that can detect alcohol on a person's breath when used within a foot or so. A green light on the flashlight indicates the detection of a small amount of alcohol, while a red light indicates a particular odor.

While these lights aren't admissible in court as evidence, they do help police officers to determine whether a FST is

in order.

These special flashlights went into use recently in Illinois, in conjunction with increased roadside safety checkpoints and higher patrol presence, to curb DUIs during the late summer holidays.


Arguments For and Against Flashlight According to the ACLU, the use of this tool by law enforcement is a violation of

an individual's civil rights.

Because the passive alcohol sensor looks exactly like a flashlight, the driver would have no idea that they are being preliminarily screened for the presence of alcohol when an officer approaches their vehicle.

Poses a serious disadvantage to designated drivers, who may be improperly asked to submit to chemical testing or field sobriety tests because alcohol was detected within their vehicle. More than a hassle and delay for a person doing the right thing.

The flashlights are nothing more than an investigative tool. It is not the entire investigation . It lets officers know that there is alcohol in the air when someone. Is stopped. Police in most states have a right to conduct sobriety checkpoints to check for intoxicated drivers,.

Proponents of the device claim it doesn't matter if the officer uses his own sense of smell or the device, it does not violate the plain sight doctrine. Hon. Mary A. Celeste

PBT to Detect Narcotics

In a recent study, published in the latest issue of The Journal of Analytical Toxicology, scientists at Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden, there is a report on a unique method for collecting narcotic substances from exhaled breath.


Portable Intoxilyzer 8000 Similar to traditional breath test machines that

detect the blood-alcohol levels this newer model is more portable and intended for use by officers on the scene.

The data gathered with the Intoxilyzer 8000 is admissible as evidence in court.

Previously an officer would have to take a suspected driver from the scene to a hospital or a police station for testing with a non-portable version of the Intoxilyzer.


http://www.totaldui.com/breathalyzers/overview/breathalyzer-bac-differences.aspx


In the works are systems that require a potential driver to activate a fingerprint detection system, Then perform various motor skill functions

in order to start the car. This method ensures that a driver is not

impaired before operating a vehicle.


Judicial Considerations

•Issues with Technology(false positives, identification, tampering)

•Scientific Reliability/Admissibility

•Constitutional Issues on Use

•Philosophical Issues (is it better to control a single car or monitor the individual’s alcohol consumption and drug use?)


There Is No Silver Bullet


“We cannot solve the problems we have created

with the same thinking that created them”

Albert Einstein Hon. Mary A. Celeste

Contact Information:

Hon. Mary A. Celeste 303-501-3242

[email protected] [email protected]


mailto:[email protected]

American Judges Association Annual Conference New …amjudges.org/conferences/materials/Celeste...

Documents

Transcript of American Judges Association Annual Conference New …amjudges.org/conferences/materials/Celeste...