Is it sufficient to rely solely on Intoxilyzer results to prove a DUI case?

Relying solely on Intoxilyzer results to prove a DUI case is not sufficient because the results of a breathalyzer test, such as the Intoxilyzer 8000, can be influenced by various factors, including calibration errors, user administration errors, and the physiological differences among individuals. Courts typically require corroborating evidence to support the claim that a driver was operating a vehicle under the influence of alcohol. This additional evidence can include the observations of law enforcement officers regarding the driver's behavior, field sobriety test results, the accident circumstances, or other relevant facts that demonstrate impaired driving.

Moreover, in many jurisdictions, legal standards dictate that the prosecution must establish a case beyond a reasonable doubt, which often necessitates more than just breath test results. The combination of multiple evidence types creates a more robust case that addresses the potential weaknesses of relying solely on breath test results. Thus, comprehensive evidence collection and presentation are crucial in a DUI prosecution to ensure that it meets the necessary legal standards for conviction.