State of Maine v. Graydon E. Adams Jr.

Summary

The Maine Supreme Judicial Court held that the certification requirements of 29-A M.R.S. § 2524(5) do not bar a defendant from offering evidence of an independently administered workplace breath-alcohol test to challenge the reliability of the State’s intoxilyzer results. The court vacated the conviction and remanded for Adams to have an opportunity to establish the reliability and admissibility of the workplace test.

Holdings

1. Section 2524(5) does not apply to an independently administered breath test offered by a defendant as rebuttal evidence. A defendant may challenge the reliability of the State's intoxilyzer evidence with any otherwise admissible evidence, including a demonstrably reliable blood or breath test that was not obtained from a Department-certified apparatus.
2. Adams preserved the issue because the trial court's erroneous interpretation of section 2524(5) denied him any meaningful opportunity to present foundational evidence or make an offer of proof regarding the workplace test's reliability.

Questions Presented

1. Whether 29-A M.R.S. § 2524(5), which requires Department of Health and Human Services approval for certain breath-alcohol testing apparatus used under Maine's implied-consent provisions, bars a defendant from introducing an independently administered workplace breath test as rebuttal evidence.
2. Whether Adams preserved his challenge to the exclusion of the workplace test despite not making a formal offer of proof under M.R. Evid. 103(a)(2).

Disposition

vacated