Again, procedure here is becoming more the issue than guilt or innocence.
What about the situation--and this is happening all too frequently--where an impaired driver is picked up and brought before the court. He obtains a lawyer and the lawyer says, “For another $5,000 we can bring in an expert to testify in reference to the charter issue. Since there are some rulings already in the court system in reference to the charter, breathalyzers, and all that other technology that has been brought into question now, we'll get you off.”
Are these legitimate arguments on impaired driving cases?