Not all breathalyzers are created equal. The machine used to measure your BAC at the police station is a specific device with a specific model number, a specific history of accuracy controversies, and specific legal challenges that have been brought against it in courts across the country.
Knowing which machine your state uses — and what documented problems exist with that machine — is critical information for your defense attorney. It's also public record. Here are the major evidentiary breath test devices currently in use across the United States and what you should know about each.
Intoxilyzer 8000 (CMI Inc.)
The Intoxilyzer 8000 has been at the center of more legal controversy than almost any other breath test device in the country. Florida's use of the Intoxilyzer 8000 became the subject of extensive litigation, with defense attorneys fighting for years to obtain the device's source code — which CMI refused to release, arguing it was proprietary trade secret information. Florida courts ultimately held that defendants were entitled to certain discovery, leading to thousands of cases being affected.
Known accuracy issues: The Intoxilyzer 8000 uses infrared spectroscopy, which can be affected by acetone (from diabetics and keto dieters), certain paint fumes and solvents, and compounds found in some medications. Older versions lacked a "slope detector" — a feature designed to detect mouth alcohol contamination in the sample. Calibration records for the Intoxilyzer 8000 have been challenged in multiple jurisdictions, with some machines found to be operating outside acceptable parameters.
What to do: If you were tested in Florida or another Intoxilyzer 8000 state, ask your attorney to request the machine's maintenance and calibration records through discovery. These are public records and must be produced. A machine that was due for calibration or had reported issues on the date of your test is producing unreliable results.
Draeger Alcotest 9510
The Draeger Alcotest 9510 became the subject of landmark litigation in New Jersey, where the state Supreme Court issued a detailed ruling (State v. Chun, 2008) that both upheld the device's general scientific reliability and imposed specific requirements for its use — including mandatory software updates, temperature accuracy requirements, and specific calibration protocols. The ruling acknowledged that the device was not perfect and imposed procedural safeguards as a condition of admissibility.
Known accuracy issues: The Alcotest uses both infrared spectroscopy and electrochemical fuel cell technology simultaneously, which is considered more reliable than single-technology devices. However, the New Jersey litigation revealed that the original software had bugs that could affect readings under certain conditions. The court-ordered software update addressed some but not all concerns raised by defense experts.
What to do: In New Jersey especially, any deviation from the specific Chun protocols (temperature readings, calibration timing, operator certification) is grounds for a motion to suppress the result. Your attorney should be familiar with the Chun requirements and verify compliance in your specific case.
DataMaster DMT (National Patent Analytical Systems)
The DataMaster DMT is a dual-technology device using both infrared spectroscopy and fuel cell analysis. It is considered one of the more reliable evidentiary breath test devices in current use. However, like all breath test devices, it is subject to operator error, calibration drift, and environmental interference.
Known accuracy issues: The DataMaster DMT's infrared component can be affected by acetone, isopropanol, and certain other compounds. The device requires regular simulator solution changes — the solution used to calibrate the machine has a specific shelf life, and expired or improperly mixed simulator solution produces inaccurate calibration checks. Wisconsin has had documented cases involving calibration solution issues affecting machine accuracy.
What to do: Request the simulator solution logs and calibration records for the specific device used in your case. Verify that the solution was within its valid use period on the date of your test. Verify that the operator was certified and that the certification was current.
Lifeloc FC20 (Lifeloc Technologies)
The Lifeloc FC20 is a fuel cell-based evidentiary breath test device. Fuel cell technology is generally considered more specific to ethyl alcohol than infrared technology alone, reducing (though not eliminating) the risk of interference from other substances. Colorado uses the FC20 as its primary evidentiary device.
Known accuracy issues: While fuel cell devices are more chemically specific than infrared, they are still subject to operator error, calibration failures, and sensitivity to certain compounds. The FC20 requires a 15-20 minute observation period before testing. Any contamination of the breath sample — from burping, using mouthwash, or having residual mouth alcohol — can affect the result even in a fuel cell device.
What to do: Verify that the mandatory observation period was properly conducted and documented. Request calibration records for the specific device. If you have any medical conditions affecting breath composition (diabetes, GERD, keto diet), discuss this with your attorney as a potential basis for expert testimony.
How to Get Your Machine's Records
Calibration records, maintenance logs, and operator certification records for the specific breath test device used in your case are typically public records and must be produced through the discovery process. Your attorney can request them from the prosecution. In some states, you can also submit a public records request directly to the law enforcement agency.
Key records to request:
- The machine's serial number and model number
- Calibration records for the 6-12 months surrounding your test date
- Any maintenance records or reported malfunctions
- The certifying officer's training records and certification expiration date
- Simulator solution logs and batch records
A pattern of calibration failures, a certification that had lapsed, or a machine that was overdue for maintenance on the date of your test are all significant findings that an experienced DWI attorney can use to challenge the reliability of your result.
License Suspended After a DWI?
Challenging the breathalyzer is one fight. Getting your license back is another. Our guides walk through the reinstatement process in every state — so you know what's coming and how to prepare.
See Your OptionsNeed a DWI Attorney?
Connect with a qualified DWI defense attorney in your area. Free consultations available in most states.
Find a DWI Attorney Near You →Sponsored — attorney referral service