Nevada justices raise bar in blood-alcohol tests
CARSON CITY — Chemists who perform blood tests used to detect alcohol or drugs in administrative or preliminary legal proceedings must be qualified as an “expert” by a Nevada court before their findings can be submitted through a written affidavit or declaration, the Nevada Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
In a 3-0 opinion, justices reversed a lower court ruling out of Clark County that denied judicial review of an administrative law judge, who revoked the driver’s license of Vincent Valenti.
“The significance is very profound here,” said John Watkins, Valenti’s lawyer. “Now anyone who does alcohol or drug testing, in order for you to try to just use a piece of paper to establish an alleged result, you’re going to have to bring in that person if they have not been qualified at least once.”
Affidavits or declarations are permissible in preliminary hearings, grand jury and administrative proceedings. In a trial, the person who conducted the testing must testify in person if objections are raised about the written testament.
Valenti was arrested by a Nevada Highway Patrol trooper on July 1, 2012. A preliminary breath test showed he had a blood-alcohol concentration of 0.154 percent, above the limit of 0.08. A subsequent blood test conducted at the Clark County Detention Center by forensic scientist Christine Maloney registered a concentration of 0.159.
In a hearing before an administrative law judge over revocation of Valenti’s driver’s license, an affidavit by Maloney attesting to Valenti’s blood-alcohol concentration was admitted as evidence. Valenti challenged the affidavit, arguing it was inadmissible because Maloney had not been deemed an expert by a court.
Justices agreed.
“In the affidavit’s absence, it cannot be said that the evidence relied upon by the administrative law judge was sufficiently substantial to revoke Valenti’s driver’s license,” Justice Michael Douglas wrote.
Justices Ron Parraguirre and Michael Cherry concurred.
“The bottom line is my client will not lose his license through the Department of Motor Vehicles,” Watkins said, adding the Valenti’s criminal DUI proceeding also is on hold.
Watkins said the ruling could have implications for other similar cases that are not yet final.
“This decision is not limited to the application of administrative hearings,” he said.
Contact Sandra Chereb at schereb@reviewjournal.com or 775-687-3901. Find her on Twitter: @SandraChereb