Ohio DUI Urine Tests are usually taken if a person is believed to be under the influence of alcohol and drugs or just drugs. Because the breath test can only detect alcohol, urine screens are the second most commonly used test.

Need professional help with your Cincinnati DUI? Then contact Suhre & Associates for your FREE Consultation using the contact form above or call our 24 Hour Emergency Number at (513) 592-3291 in Cincinnati.

What Can I Do If I Took A DUI Urine Test?

In order for the urine test to be admissible in court, the police and lab that tested the urine must have followed the proper procedures. At Suhre & Associates, we obtain copies of all the pertinent documents related to the collection of the urine specimen and the testing of the sample. Once we receive the records from the prosecutor we review them to see if the authorities complied with the Administrative Code. Some of the most common reasons urine test results are excluded as evidence are:

  • The urine sample was not collected by an authorized person within three hours of the alleged violation in accordance with division (D) of section 4511.19.
  • The collection of the urine specimen was not witnessed pursuant to OAC 3701-53-05(D).
  • The urine sample was not deposited into a clean glass or plastic screw-top container nor was it capped pursuant to OAC 3701-53-05(D). If the sample was not obtained in this way, it was not alternatively collected according to the laboratory protocol as written in the laboratory procedural manual also pursuant to 3701-53-05(D).
  • The urine container was not sealed in a manner such that tampering could be detected pursuant to OAC 3701-53-05(E).
  • The urine container did not contain a label that contained the information required in OAC 3701-53-05(E) (1-4).
  • The urine sample was not kept refrigerated at all times except for transit or examination pursuant to OAC 3701-53-05(F).
  • The urine was not analyzed by one of the approved methods contained in OAC 3701-53-03(A1)(A2) for alcohol or (B) (1-6) for drugs of abuse.
  • The method used to analyze the urine for alcohol, if not a specifically approved method, does not have documented sensitivity, accuracy, precision, and linearity pursuant to OAC 3701-53-03(A).
  • The method used to analyze the urine for alcohol, if not a specifically approved method, is not based on procedures that have been published in a peer-reviewed or juried scientific journal or thoroughly documented by the laboratory pursuant to OAC 3701-53-03(A).
  • The positive results of presumptive tests for drugs of abuse were not confirmed by one or more dissimilar analytical techniques or methods as a part of a testing procedure as required by OAC 3701-53-03(B).
  • The confirmatory techniques or methods for tests for drugs of abuse did not have similar or improved sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, precision and linearity compared to the original test pursuant to OAC 3701-55-03(B).
  • The confirmatory techniques or methods for tests of drugs of abuse were not based on procedures that have been published in a peer-reviewed or juried scientific journal or thoroughly documented by the laboratory pursuant to OAC 3701-53-03(B).
  • The laboratory which performed the tests of the urine did not document the chain of custody of the sample or the results of the urine tests as required by OAC 3701-53-06(A)
  • The urine specimen obtained and analyzed by the laboratory has not been retained in accordance with OAC 3701-53-05 pursuant to OAC 3701-53-06(A).
  • The laboratory analyzing the urine specimen did not participate in the national proficiency testing program using the applicable technique or method for which the laboratory personnel sought a permit under rule 3701-53-09 of the administrative code pursuant to OAC 3701-53-06(B).
  • The laboratory performing the test did not maintain at least one copy of the written procedure manual in use for performing tests under rule 3701-53-03 of the OAC in the area where the tests were performed pursuant to OAC 3701-53-06(C), and 3701-53-01(B).
  • The laboratory personnel did not conduct the test in accordance with the laboratory’s written procedure manual pursuant to OAC 3701-53-06(C).
  • The designated laboratory director did not review, sign, and date the written procedure manual as certifying the manual in compliance with OAC 3701-53-06, pursuant to subsection (D) of that rule.
  • The designated laboratory director did not ensure that any changes in a procedure were approved, signed, and dated by the designated laboratory director pursuant to OAC 3701-53-06(D)(1).
  • The designated laboratory director did not ensure that a copy of each procedure is maintained with the date the procedure was first used and the date was revised or discontinued pursuant to OAC 3701-53-06(D)(2).
  • The designated laboratory director did not ensure that a copy of the procedure is retained for the later of three years after a procedure was revised or discontinued, or in accordance with a written order by any court to the laboratory to save a specimen that was analyzed under that procedure pursuant to OAC 3701-53-06(D)(3).
  • The designated laboratory director did not ensure that the laboratory technicians who analyzed the urine were adequately trained and experienced to conduct testing of bodily fluids for alcohol and drugs, nor did the designated laboratory director ensure and document the maintained competency of laboratory technicians pursuant to OAC 3701-53-06(D)(4).
  • The designated laboratory director did not monitor the work performance and verify the skills of the laboratory technicians involved in the testing of the sample pursuant to OAC 3701-53-06(D)(4).
  • The designated laboratory director did not ensure that the procedures manual referred to the criteria the laboratory used in developing standards, controls, and calibrations for the technique or method involved in analyzing the urine sample pursuant to OAC 3701-53-06(D)(5).
  • The designated laboratory director did not ensure that a complete and timely written procedure manual was available and followed by laboratory technicians during the analysis of the urine sample pursuant to OAC 3701-53-06(D)(6).
  • If the designated laboratory director was replaced, another permitted laboratory director was not designated, nor did he or she review and revise the written procedural manual as appropriate pursuant to OAC 3701-53-06(E).
  • The laboratory technician who analyzed the urine did not complete the proficiency exam, administered by a national program for proficiency testing for the approved technique or method of analysis used to test the urine, in a satisfactory manner, pursuant to OAC 3701-53-07(A)(2) for alcohol and OAC 3701-53-07(B)(2) for drugs of abuse.
  • The laboratory technician who analyzed the urine had not been certified by the designated laboratory director that he or she is competent to perform all procedures contained in the laboratory’s written procedure manual for testing specimens, pursuant to OAC 3701-53-07(A)(2) for alcohol and 3701-53-07(B)(2) for drugs of abuse.
  • The laboratory technician who analyzed the urine did not meet the requirements set forth in OAC 3701-53-07 (A)(2)(a-d) for alcohol testing and OAC 3701-53-07(B)(2)(a-d) for drug testing.
  • The person analyzing the urine sample did not have a laboratory director’s permit or a laboratory technician’s permit issued by the director of health under OAC 3701-53-09(A)(1) for alcohol testing and (A)(2) for drug testing; and if it was not the designated laboratory director who performed the tests, the testing technician was not under the general direction of a laboratory director pursuant to OAC 3701-53-07(A) for alcohol testing and (B) for drug testing.
  • The person analyzing the urine, if they were a laboratory technician, did not conduct a technique or method of analysis that was listed on the laboratory director’s permit, pursuant to OAC 3701-53-07(A) for alcohol testing and 3701-53-07(B) for drug testing.
  • The designated director of the laboratory where the urine was analyzed does not meet the qualifications for said laboratory director’s permit, pursuant to OAC 3701-53-07(A)(1) for alcohol testing and OAC 3701-53-07(B)(1) for drug testing.
  • The director of the laboratory where the urine was analyzed was not subject to surveys as required by OAC 3701-53-08(A)(1).
  • The analytical techniques used in testing the specimen, pursuant to OAC 3701-53-03, were not checked each testing day for proper calibration under the general direction of the designated laboratory director as required by OAC 3701-53-04(D).
  • The results of instrument checks, calibration checks, and records of service and repairs were not retained in accordance with paragraph (A) of OAC 3701-53-01, pursuant to OAC 3507-53-04(E).

Do not panic if you took a DUI urine test and the results came back positive. An experienced DUI lawyer at Suhre & Associates, LLC can help you explore the details of the case and see if there is any possibility that the results were inaccurate or obtained illegally. With a former police officer and former prosecutors on our team, we know what to look for when it comes to mistakes administering the urine tests. We offer a free consultation, so give us a call today to get started with your defense.

Contact the Cincinnati DUI Law Firm at Suhre & Associates, LLC For Help Today

For more information, contact the DUI attorneys at Suhre & Associates, LLC give us a call today at (513) 333-0014 or visit us at our Cincinnati law office.

Suhre & Associates, LLC – Cincinnati
600 Vine Street, Suite 1004
Cincinnati, OH 45202
United States