Legal Opinion

People v. Testa

Auburn City Court

Decided September 27, 2000Published

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Michael F. McKeon, J.

Defendant charged in an accusatory instrument with driving while intoxicated moves to suppress the results of a test performed of his breath on a breath-testing device known as the Datamaster or in the alternative requests a Frye hearing to determine the scientific reliability of that instrument.

Although the Fourth Department has yet to rule on this issue, the Third Department in People v Hampe (181 AD2d 238, lv denied 80 NY2d 930) ruled that it was not error to admit the results of a BAG Verifier breath-testing device absent testimony of an expert…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Mountain View Coach Lines, Inc. v. StormsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
  2. People v. HampeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
  3. People v. HolmesJustice Court of Town of Brighton · 1997

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API