[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-292897-105":59,"doc-detail-292897-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","memorandum-of-decision-on-consolidated-defendantsmotion-to-compel-and-impose-sanctions","MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON CONSOLIDATED DEFENDANTS'MOTION TO COMPEL AND IMPOSE SANCTIONS","","Decision analyzing a motion to compel and impose sanctions in a Massachusetts criminal case involving breath-test evidence from the Alcotest 9510. The Court recounts prior rulings addressing scientific reliability of BAC results, including device operation, source code implementation, blood-to-breath ratio theory, and calibration/certification methodologies used by the Massachusetts State Police OAT. It then describes discovery failures found in subsequent hearings and an investigative report, leading to an agreed joint stipulation expanding presumptive exclusion and setting an unresolved end date for that expanded period.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/memorandum-of-decision-on-consolidated-defendantsmotion-to-compel-and-impose-sanctions/292897/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/memorandum-of-decision-on-consolidated-defendantsmotion-to-compel-and-impose-sanctions/292897.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Blaney","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-02","2026-09-17",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":29},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What breath-test evidence does the memorandum address?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"The memorandum addresses breath-test results produced by the Alcotest 9510 breathalyzer instrument.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"What did the Court previously determine about the Alcotest 9510 and BAC reliability?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"The Court determined the device’s operation, underlying source code implementation, blood-to-breath ratio theory, and later OAT methodology produce scientifically reliable BAC results, while earlier annual calibration/certification did not.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"Why was the motion to compel and impose sanctions filed?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"It was filed after hearings indicated OAT failed to disclose exculpatory worksheets, suggesting hundreds of similar documents were withheld.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},292897,1789657200,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":29,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":129,"read_time":144,"preview_page_count":4},1236954677761,"https://us-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_994ba38a5ba835b3df7d355c54d3ed8d","COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTSBOSTON MUNICIPALANDDISTRICT COURT DEPARTMENTSDOCKET NOS.1248 CR 1075,1201 CR 3898,and others  \nCOMMONWEALTH  \nV.  \nEVANDO ANANIAS,CHRISTIAN FIGUEROA,AND OTHERS  \n# MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON CONSOLIDATED DEFENDANTS'MOTION TO COMPELAND IMPOSE SANCTIONS\n\nOn February 16,2017,this Court issued a Memorandum of Decision denying in part andallowing in part a motion filed by defendants of the Boston Municipal Court and District CourtDepartments charged with Operating a Motor Vehicle while Under the Influence of IntoxicatingLiquor seeking.in limine,to exclude breath test results produced by the Alcotest 9510.abreathalyzer instrument developed by Draeger Safety Diagnostics,Inc.(Draeger).In sum,theCourt determined that(1)the Alcotest 9510 breathalyzer device operates in a manner thatproduces scientifically reliable blood alcohol content(BAC)results;(2)the source codeunderlying the Alcotest 9510 breathalyzer device was developed and implemented in a mannerthat produces scientifically reliable BAC results;(3)the theory of blood-to-breath ratiounderlying the algorithmic functions used by the Alcotest 9510 to produce BAC results remainssound science;(4)the methodology employed by the Massachusetts State Police Office ofAlcohol Testing(OAT)from September 14,2014 to the present produces scientifically reliableBAC results;and(5)the annual calibration and certification methodology employed by OAT  \nfrom June 2011 to September 14,2014 did not produce scientifically reliable BAC results,butthe Commonwealth could demonstrate to the trial judge,on a case-by-case basis,that a particularAlcotest 9510 was calibrated and certified using scientifically reliable methodology,and thusthat a particular BAC result is scientifically reliable.Commonwealth v.Ananias,et.al,1248 CR1075(February 16,2017).Following this decision,District and Boston Municipal Court trialjudges held hearings with respect to the calibration and certification methodology employed byOAT where the Commonwealth sought to introduce evidence of breath test results that wereproduced between June 2011 and September 14,2014.On August 2,2017,during one suchhearing at Taunton District Court,the Court (Brennan,M.,J.)determined that OAT had failed todisclose exculpatory worksheets demonstrating that the particular Alcotest 9510 at issue hadfailed certain calibration tests.Commonwealth v.Harvey(1431 CR 2259);Commonwealth v.Derochers(1431 CR 1085);and Commonwealth v.Simmons(1431 CR 2722).This confirmedthe consolidated defendants'suspicion,based upon their comparison of the number ofworksheets produced during the Ananias litigation to the significantly larger number of the sametype of documents provided in response to a subsequent Freedom of Information Act(FOIA)request,that OAT had failed to produce hundreds of similar exculpatory documents.  \nOn August 19,2017,the consolidated defendants filed this Motion to Compel and ImposeSanctions.The Commonwealth filed a Notice of Discovery on August 31,2018,and producedthe materials identified by the defendants as having been withheld.In a series of additionalfilings,the Commonwealth asserted that OAT had not made them aware of these documents,despite prosecutors'best efforts to obtain all required discovery.On August 31,2017,Secretaryof Public Safety Daniel J.Bennett directed the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security(EOPSS)to investigate OAT's discovery practices.In an extensive report dated October 16,  \n2017,EOPSS identified various instances of intentional withholding of exculpatory evidence,blatant disregard of court orders,and other errors,all underscored by“a longstanding and insularinstitutional culture that was reflexively guarded”at OAT.Exhibit 28.In conjunction with thisreport,by letter to Colonel Richard McKeon of the Massachusetts State Police,SecretaryBennett directed the State Police to take certain actions with respect to the management andoperation of OAT,with particular focus on its discovery practices.Mea","cbCaitql5Hs8uGJS","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaitql5Hs8uGJS","pdf",3041478,28,"English","# Memorandum of Decision\n## Denial and Partial Allowance of Motion\n## Discovery Failures and Investigations\n## Joint Stipulation of Facts and Recommended Resolution\n## Dispute Over Expanded Presumptive Exclusion Period","[{\"question\":\"What breath-test evidence does the memorandum address?\",\"answer\":\"The memorandum addresses breath-test results produced by the Alcotest 9510 breathalyzer instrument.\"},{\"question\":\"What did the Court previously determine about the Alcotest 9510 and BAC reliability?\",\"answer\":\"The Court determined the device’s operation, underlying source code implementation, blood-to-breath ratio theory, and later OAT methodology produce scientifically reliable BAC results, while earlier annual calibration/certification did not.\"},{\"question\":\"Why was the motion to compel and impose sanctions filed?\",\"answer\":\"It was filed after hearings indicated OAT failed to disclose exculpatory worksheets, suggesting hundreds of similar documents were withheld.\"}]","MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON CONSOLIDATED DEFENDANTS'MOTION TO COMPEL AND IMPOSE SANCTIONS | PDF",71]