Press Releases

South Dakota Supreme Court Upholds Validity of SCRAM Alcohol Monitors

October 15, 2009, Littleton, CO – In the nation’s first appellate decision on the use of SCRAM alcohol monitors as a reliable way to monitor criminal offenders for alcohol consumption, the South Dakota Supreme Court has issued a ruling that upholds the admissibility of SCRAM testimony and evidence under the standard established by Daubert v. Merrill Dow Pharmaceuticals.

The opinion, filed September 16th, was in the case State of South Dakota v. Neal J. Lemler. The defendant, sentenced to wear the SCRAM monitor when he was convicted as a third-time DUI offender in 2006, claimed that the SCRAM system inaccurately confirmed drinking when he had an environmental exposure to alcohol-based products while at work.

SCRAM (Secure Continuous Remote Alcohol Monitor) is an ankle bracelet, worn 24/7, that samples an offender’s perspiration every 30 minutes in order to measure for alcohol consumption. The system is used on criminal offenders in 48 states to monitor compliance with court-ordered sobriety, often a condition of bond or probation. To-date, SCRAM has monitored more than 113,000 offenders.

The Court’s ruling is significant to jurisdictions across the country in that it’s the first appellate-level decision to uphold the product’s admissibility under Daubert, which is considered the most stringent standard applied by courts when evaluating the admissibility of scientific evidence in a court of law. According to Denver-based Alcohol Monitoring Systems (AMS), which manufactures and markets SCRAM, the Court’s ruling validated the use of SCRAM in a number of key areas, including recognition that transdermal testing is well-established and reliable, that the SCRAM technology and data are valid and reliable, and that the system can reliably distinguish between consumed alcohol and environmental exposure to a product containing alcohol.

The ruling also recognized that AMS Chief Technology Officer Jeffrey Hawthorne, who co-invented SCRAM, is an expert in the field, noting that he has “substantial knowledge and experience in transdermal alcohol measurement and SCRAM technology.” According to Mike Iiams, chairman and CEO of AMS, the company’s policy of providing ongoing court support and expert testimony for court challenges is unique in the electronic monitoring industry. “Establishing judicial precedent and meeting the standards established by the courts should be an essential process for any alcohol monitoring technology used in the criminal justice system,” says Iiams. “We take our responsibility to provide reliable, valid data to the courts very seriously,” says Iiams. He adds that AMS has invested heavily in both stringent data interpretation protocols and the company’s court support program. “An alcohol testing technology that can’t meet the standards of Frye or Daubert to validate a confirmed drinking event or the science and technology behind the system is of little use to the justice system,” he says.

Expert Defense Witness Substantiates SCRAM Reliability
According to AMS, one of the most notable elements of the ruling is that the Court found that the expert witness for Lemler, Dr. Michael Hlastala, a forensic toxicologist from Washington State, provided testimony that re-enforced the reliability of SCRAM and the court’s confidence that the system can distinguish between consumed alcohol and environmental interferrants. Hlastala, a frequent defense expert in SCRAM evidentiary hearings across the U.S., testified that the general principles underlying SCRAM are “scientifically sound” and “widely accepted.” He also conceded that if Lemler had actually been exposed to the products he claimed—John Deere^® starter fluid and graphite lubricants—that the bracelet would have reacted at other times than the isolated instances reflected in Lemler’s data.

The Court also noted that Hlastala’s theories, which questioned SCRAM’s ability to distinguish between exposure to some products that contain alcohol and actual consumption, were only hypotheticals. “Dr. Hlastala offered no testimony that one of his possible variable scenarios actually affected the transdermal alcohol detection in this case,” the Court wrote.

SCRAM Policies and Scientific Research
The court also found that AMS policies and practices relative to their processes for evaluating and confirming consumption provide every reasonable benefit of the doubt to SCRAM clients. The Court placed weight on both the AMS policy of testing products that clients claim caused false positives and the company’s policy of calibrating bracelets conservatively as factors that weighed in their decision. Hlastala agreed, citing the AMS standard regarding the elimination rate as a “reasonable choice for a cutoff.”

The Court also found that the body of research, including peer-reviewed studies of both transdermal testing and SCRAM technology, are sufficient to meet the Daubert standard for peer-reviewed research.

To-date, SCRAM has been found to be admissible and reliable in 24 Frye, Daubert or hybrid evidentiary hearings across the U.S.

About Alcohol Monitoring Systems, Inc.
Established in 1997, Alcohol Monitoring Systems, Inc. manufactures SCRAM^®, the world’s only Continuous Alcohol Monitoring system, which uses non-invasive transdermal analysis to monitor 24/7 for alcohol consumption. SCRAM fully automates the alcohol testing and reporting process, providing courts and community corrections agencies with the ability to continuously monitor alcohol offenders, increase offender accountability and assess compliance with sentencing requirements and treatment guidelines. Alcohol Monitoring Systems employs 104 people across the U.S. and is a privately-held company headquartered in Littleton, Colorado.