The Ohio Channel

June 11, 2014

06-11-2014

5,404 Views

Share Download

Start At sec End At sec

Link

Embed Code

Available Versions

Download 360p Video

Collections

Supreme Court of Ohio

Description

Is Defendant's Request for Data from Breath Alcohol Machine a Challenge to His Specific Test or General Attack on the Instrument's Reliability?

City of Cincinnati v. Daniel Ilg, Case no. 2013-1102

First District Court of Appeals (Hamilton County)

ISSUE: Did a defendant arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol who took a breath alcohol test demand production of information about the breath-testing instrument that is in violation of the Ohio Supreme Court's decision in State v. Vega (1984)?

Tags

Ohio Government Judicial Branch Supreme Court of Ohio Read-Only Discovery Discoverable Request BAC Breath Alcohol DUI OVI Ohio Department of Health Health Department Intoxilyzer 8000 Expert Challenge Motion to Compel Motion to Suppress

Markers Transcript

00:00:47	Jennifer Bishop for the city of Cincinnati
00:19:19	Steven Adams for Daniel Ilg
00:30:20	Timothy Huey for amicus curiae National College for DUI Defense on behalf of Daniel Ilg
00:37:45	Summation: Jennifer Bishop for the city of Cincinnati

There is no transcript for this video.

Note : Transcripts are compiled from uncorrected captions