Counter-examination after an alcohol or drug test

What question should the counter-investigation answer?

A counter-examination can be considered because you want to have a measured value checked or you have questions about the analysis. It does not automatically solve every problem in the traffic case. A discussion about who was driving, the time of driving or a procedural action may require different information. Therefore, start with the goal: which finding is being checked and which result can be meaningful? An unfavorable feeling about the result is a reason for consultation, but not yet a detailed research question.

Our editorial analysis is that a counter-investigation should be a targeted check and not a magical second chance. The same material can again yield an unfavorable value. A difference may require expert explanation instead of immediately invalidating one result. A procedural objection to the first investigation also remains its own question. By separating these goals it becomes clear which specialist is needed and which actions must be organized in a timely manner.

Breath test and blood test have their own route

The Alcohol, Drugs and Medicines in Traffic Decree and the implementation regulations contain rules on investigations and counter-investigations. In the case of a breath analysis, the counter-examination via a blood test may have a different timing and organization than a counter-examination after a blood test that has already been performed. A procedure description for one type should therefore not simply be used for the other. Investigations after a violent crime are also not automatically the same framework as traffic investigations. (Decree on alcohol, drugs and medicines in traffic · implementation regulations)

Ask the lawyer what step was taken in your case and what communication about the right to a counter-investigation was involved. Save the literal instruction. Do not use a general term from an old online response as a replacement for the current regulation and the specific notification. This may involve different moments for questions, payment and making materials available. Those steps must be checked in their order. A request that is only mentioned in a conversation is not always a completed assignment.

Why acting immediately is important

An analysis has a material and storage history. The option to perform a follow-up investigation is not available indefinitely regardless of that history. Therefore, please contact the lawyer immediately after receiving the result or information about the law. Do not wait for the summons because the criminal case still seems far away. The practical organization of a counter-investigation may be more urgent than the substantive hearing. An ongoing CBR procedure can also exist alongside the criminal process.

Record the date of communication, transmission and actual receipt. Save the envelope and any digital messages. Ask what specific terms and instructions apply to the correct route and which starting point is used. The goal is not to construct an uncertain calendar ourselves, but to make the relevant facts available. If a term is already potentially problematic, it should be discussed immediately. Waiting for perfect evidence can further limit the remaining options.

The correct sample must be linked to the correct order

In the case of counter-examination after blood tests, the link with the original material is important. Check the spore identification number and details on the notification and report. An incorrectly copied number can cause a practical error before a laboratory assesses anything substantively. Keep the original documents and carefully type identification information. Only share them with the parties who need them for the assignment.

Ask which laboratory conducted the initial investigation and how the relevant material for the counter-examination is made available. Do not collect or move materials yourself without proper instruction. The official regulations describe which researchers and conditions apply. A commercial provider who carries out drug tests in a general sense is not automatically suitable for the intended criminal counter-investigation. Have the lawyer or competent investigator confirm that the chosen route and identification are in line with the legal framework.

A quotation and payment do not constitute a complete investigation

A counter-investigation may incur costs and there may be separate steps for ordering and payment. Ask what is being investigated, what costs are involved and when the payment or order must be received. A bank transfer without proper identification or order may be insufficient to start work. Conversely, a quotation can only provide information without the material transfer having already been arranged. Therefore, check the entire chain and not just the proof of payment.

If you have financial problems, immediately discuss the possibilities and limits. A financial problem does not automatically extend an investigation or retention period. Nor does an subsidized legal aid for legal assistance mean without verification that every external investigation is reimbursed. Ask the lawyer what arrangement applies and what choice still needs to be made in a timely manner. Make the cost agreement clear before you agree. An unclear assignment can cause both a financial conflict and a delay in the substantive assessment.

Don't let the result say more than it examines

A laboratory can investigate certain substances or values according to a method. This does not mean that the report independently decides whether someone has committed a certain traffic offense. A question about driving behavior, noticeable influence or the relationship between take-off moment and driving moment may require additional expert interpretation. Therefore, have it recorded which research question is asked and which conclusions fall outside the scope of the assignment.

A lower number is also not automatically favorable for every legal standard. The applicable limit, unit, combination of substances and measurement context must be assessed. Discuss the outcome with the lawyer and, if necessary, an appropriate expert. It is unwise to make a calculation yourself that directly compares numbers from different forms of research without knowing the method and conditions. The value of counter-examination lies precisely in verifiability, not in selecting the lowest available figure.

Fictional example: paid, material not yet linked

Suppose that in a fictitious case a director pays a laboratory after reading about counter research online. He only uses his name as a description and does not send the notification. It later turns out that the provider does not yet have a usable order or sample identification. The payment shows a desire to have research done, but not yet that the correct material has been examined in time. The example shows why each link requires confirmation.

The lawyer then checks the suitable investigator, the legal route and the available identification. He asks what is still missing and which period is important. The driver keeps payment and correspondence without pretending that the later addition had already been sent. The example does not predict a recovery option if a term has expired. It makes it clear that a substantive wish only becomes practically feasible when the assignment, material and confirmation match.

Compare two reports with the same definitions

Place the first and second reports side by side. Check sample identification, substances tested, units, method, date and comments. A difference may have a technical explanation or raise a specific question. It is not responsible to simply cut the final values ​​from both reports and create a favorable story. Ask the expert how the results are comparable and what uncertainty remains. Write down the explanation with the source and role of the author.

The lawyer can then determine what significance the material has for the criminal or other proceedings. A counter report must be properly entered into the file. Simply keeping it in your own folder does not ensure that the judge knows it. Also consider the possibility that a report may not show a relevant difference. A carefully conducted investigation is not a failure just because it does not produce the desired outcome; it may, however, reduce the scope for a particular defense.

Discuss a missed announcement or obstacle separately

If you claim that you were not informed of the right or that you actually had no useful option, describe what happened. What message does the documents contain, what do you remember and which documents support a difference? Your own memory and an official report are different sources that must be assessed. Let the lawyer determine which legal rule and possible consequences apply. A missed practical step by the applicant is not automatically the same situation as a defective official communication.

Here too, a possible defect does not automatically end the whole case. The nature of the standard, facts and consequences must be worked out in concrete terms. Continue to monitor new letters and hearings while that question is investigated. A complaint about the counter-investigation route is not automatically a legal remedy against a CBR decision or a criminal order. The same result can become meaningful in different processes, but each process has its own procedural position.

A security card for lawyers and researchers

Use this editorial overview immediately during the first discussion. It is not a research assignment and not a personal term calculation. Mark which parts have been confirmed and which still need to be arranged. This makes it clear whether there is only an intention or an actually executable chain from assignment to report. Keep the original documents unchanged.

• Examination: breath, blood or another type, with the correct traffic law context.
• Notice: date, content, receipt and instruction on counter-investigation.
• Material: initial laboratory, spore identification and available reports.
• Route: Appropriate investigator, formal application and confirmed material transfer.
• Costs: quotation, required payment and link to the correct order.
• Deadline: controlled starting point, required actions and responsible person.
• Result: report, expert explanation, correct file entry and separate procedure monitoring.