State v. Burnett

Skoglund, J.,

¶ 32. dissenting. Simply put, the State failed to demonstrate that the DataMaster used on defendant’s breath sample was operating according to the standards set by the Department of Health at the time of the test. Before returning any results, the machine produced a standard-out-of-range error, indicating that it could not properly an.1yze the breath sample to the degree of accuracy required. The machine was not working. This “fatal error,” as it is described in the Vermont Crimin.1 Justice Training Council’s manual on Infrared Breath Testing Device, could not be remedied by…