scottsdale controversy

The Arizona Supreme Court ruled that blood-alcohol tests from the Scottsdale crime lab will not be excluded as evidence in Scottsdale DUI cases.

Due to inconsistent error reports, the Court released an opinion in late April ruling that tests from the headspace gas chromatograph machine are valid to use in DUI cases.

While the machine did produce some faulty test results, results were not always inaccurate, therefore leading the justices to determine that evidence couldn’t be dismissed from all DUI cases. Instead, a judge will decide if the evidence is inherently unreliable, in which case the tests wouldn’t be considered.

However, in more difficult cases, a judge may not be able to determine whether the evidence is inherently unreliable, and it will be up to jurors to decide if the tests can be used as credible evidence.

This means that not every Scottsdale DUI case can dismiss BAC tests from the machine, but defense attorneys can present the flaws of the lab and the machine to the jury, regardless of whether their clients’ tests were erroneous.

In July 2013, the Scottsdale crime lab was the center of controversy when news broke that the equipment used to test blood alcohol levels of those arrested on suspicion of DUI was outdated and defective, resulting in mislabelled and inaccurate data for as many as 50 percent of samples.

The machine is longer in operation, and the Scottsdale DUI cases can proceed in court under this new ruling.

Prosecutors in Maricopa County are fighting a Superior Court judge’s ruling to eliminate blood evidence in 11 DUI cases which could affect previous DUI convictions in Scottsdale.

Defense attorneys in the 11 aggravated-DUI and extreme-DUI cases argued that defective equipment and lab administrators of the Scottsdale Police Crime Lab did not meet scientific standards to merit or account for the accuracy of the four-year-old blood-testing machine. They also questioned the capability of the lab employees, doubting their ability to detect errors should they occur.

In August, Judge Jerry Bernstein barred prosecutors from introducing the machine’s blood-testing results in the 11 cases, and in response, Maricopa County Attorney’s Office filed a special action challenging this ruling.

The appeal stated that Bernstein misunderstood the state’s grounds for evidentiary dismissal and that a handful of errors revealed in the court could not condemn a machine that has conducted thousands of tests during a two-year period.

The machine performed more than 20,000 tests during a two-year period, and although the lab has suspended its use, prosecutors argue that there is allowance for a slight margin of error.

Of the 31 problem tests recorded in the appeal, the County Attorney’s office must determine whether these are the only bad results that Scottsdale is aware of, and if the lab has conducted an audit and can confirm that of the thousands of tests conducted, these 31 are the only erred ones.

This evidentiary debate has caused concern because if the ruling stands, any DUI convictions in the past few years in Scottsdale could be called into question.

Currently, the Scottsdale City Prosecutor’s Office is not considering the superior court’s decision at all in its evaluation of cases and extension of plea offers. Judges have precluded defense attorneys from even mentioning the decision at trial, allowing many jurors to remain uninformed of such problems.

As always, having an experienced DUI defense attorney on your side can help prevent or correct a wrongful conviction. Seeking professional counsel is the best choice if you or a loved one is involved in a DUI case. You need someone who can get you the best outcome possible and challenge any injustices that have already, or could come your way.

Police officers are known for protecting and serving citizens. But what happens when the actions of these individuals are called into question?

Earlier this year, the validity of case report testimony by one Scottsdale Police Sergeant, Anthony Bellissimo, was questioned, leading to his resignation. Unanswered questions about cases he was involved in over his career remain, including ongoing cases.

False Testimony

On April 7, Bellissimo was on duty when a shots-fired call was received at Jackrabbit Lounge, in the 4200 block of North Drinkwater Boulevard. According to the report, Bellissimo was to supervise officers, impound evidence and write a report at the site of the shooting.

According to the report, Bellissimo not only failed to fulfill his duties as sergeant but also provided misleading reports as to his whereabouts.

According to an internal-affairs report, when confronted with information about the shots-fired call, Bellissimo claimed he was handling a fighting call at 2:19 a.m. However, during their investigation, Scottsdale investigators pulled records that showed the fighting call came in at 2:40 a.m., 21 minutes after the shots-fired call.

In addition, Bellissimo indicated to investigators that he had interviewed an officer by phone about the call and he “distinctly remember[s] making a phone call.” Despite his claim, cell phone data shows that Bellissimo never made the phone call to another officer about the shots-fired claim.

Although Bellissimo has not been charged, the internal-affairs report concluded that, “all of [the] statements about his [Bellissimo’s] availability to respond were untrue.”

The Aftermath

Bellissimo resigned on May 16 while the Internal Affairs Unit Officers investigated the April 7 shots-fired call. The Scottsdale Police found that Bellissimo was untruthful in interviews, showed poor judgment and failed to supervise the April 7 report of shots fired near the Jackrabbit Lounge in Scottsdale, AZ.

In such cases, officers’ names are typically placed on an “integrity list” of Maricopa County police officers whose truthfulness has been challenged, said Jerry Cobb, a spokesman for the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office.

Many cases handled by Bellissimo, including Arizona DUI arrests, may now be called into question due to doubts about his truthfulness.

What This Means for Defendants

Such cases illustrate the need to always protect yourself and your family with a qualified, experienced criminal defense lawyer. Knowledge of this and similar cases can help in your defense. Hiring an experienced Arizona DUI attorney is strongly advised since an Arizona DUI conviction will remain on your record permanently and will be used as a prior offense for the next seven years.

Our criminal defense team in Scottsdale has been involved in more than 15,000 DUI cases in Arizona. and we give you the benefit of our expertise when fighting your case.

Having an Arizona DUI attorney with experience means your case will be handled by DUI lawyers who know how the system works and how to best defend you against an Arizona DUI or drunk driving charge.

Please contact Corso Law Group today for a free consultation. Our criminal defense attorneys will meet with you to discuss your unique situation and help you determine the best means of action.

To schedule a free consultation, please call (480) 471-4616. Corso Law Group is located at 17470 N. Pacesetter Way Scottsdale, AZ 85255.