- Consumer's Choice Award 2019
- Consumer's Choice Award 2020
- Consumer's Choice Award 2021
- Consumer's Choice Award 2022
- Consumer's Choice Award 2023
- Consumer's Choice Award 2024
If you face a DUI charge in Illinois based on a breath or blood test, understanding how those results were obtained and whether they can be challenged is essential to your defense. Breath and blood testing involve machines, procedures, and human handling that can introduce errors at multiple stages. From calibration records to field procedures and chain of custody, there are many points where problems can arise. Our goal with this guide is to explain common issues, outline potential defenses, and help you know what to ask and expect during the process so you can protect your rights and ability to drive.
Breath tests and blood draws are often presented as clear proof of impairment, but the reality is more complicated. Breathalyzers require routine maintenance and correct operation, while blood tests require proper collection, storage, and laboratory analysis. Mistakes can occur during officer training, device calibration, sample labeling, or transportation. Challenging test results often involves reviewing maintenance logs, calibration records, toxicology reports, and officer notes to identify inconsistencies or procedural failures. Understanding these technical and procedural details can make a meaningful difference in the outcome of a DUI case in Illinois.
Mounting a focused challenge to breath or blood test results can change the trajectory of a DUI case. Many prosecutions rely heavily on numeric readings, but those numbers depend on machinery, human steps, and chain of custody that can be questioned. A successful challenge can lead to suppression of test results, reduced charges, or leverage in plea negotiations. Beyond the immediate charges, addressing testing problems can protect driving privileges and minimize long-term consequences like increased insurance costs or employment impacts. A thorough review of records and procedures can reveal weaknesses the defense can use effectively in court.
Frankfort Law Group is a team of trial lawyers serving clients across Illinois, including cases involving breath and blood testing disputes in DUI matters. We focus on investigating the circumstances around testing, obtaining and reviewing maintenance and calibration logs, and questioning procedural lapses that may affect test reliability. Our attorneys advocate aggressively in hearings to protect clients’ rights and to present technical challenges in clear, persuasive terms. We also prioritize communication so clients understand the process, the options available, and the realistic outcomes that can be achieved at each stage of a case.
Challenging breath and blood results starts with a detailed understanding of how those tests work and the legal standards that apply in Illinois. Breath tests measure alcohol in exhaled air and use algorithms to estimate blood alcohol concentration, relying on properly calibrated instruments and correct operator technique. Blood tests require medically sound collection procedures, documented chain of custody, and accurate laboratory analysis. Legal challenges often hinge on whether procedures followed state and laboratory protocols, whether records are complete, and whether test conditions introduced contamination or measurement errors.
A defense investigation typically includes obtaining maintenance and calibration logs, toxicology reports, hospital blood draw documentation, and officer reports. Relevant questions include when the device was last calibrated, whether the operator followed required steps, and whether the blood sample handling met laboratory standards. For blood tests, information about who drew the sample, how it was labeled, and how it was stored can be decisive. For breath tests, technician training, instrument warmup records, and environmental factors may be key. Challenging the foundation of test results requires careful document review and technical inquiry.
A breath or blood test challenge is the process of questioning the validity, accuracy, or admissibility of chemical test results used in DUI prosecutions. Challenges may assert that the device was poorly maintained, that testing operators failed to follow procedures, or that sample collection and chain of custody were compromised. In court, these challenges can lead to hearings on suppression or to attacking the weight of the evidence at trial. The defense may consult laboratory records, expert interpretations, or procedural manuals to identify weaknesses in the prosecution’s presentation of test results.
Key elements reviewed when challenging chemical test results include device maintenance and calibration history, operator logs, breath test printouts, toxicology laboratory worksheets, and chain of custody documentation for blood samples. The defense examines whether manufacturers’ protocols were followed, whether devices had known faults, and whether human error could have affected readings. Additional factors include the timing of tests relative to driving, whether the subject had conditions that affect readings, and any gaps in documentation. Each of these elements can play an important role in undermining the presumed accuracy of test results.
This glossary explains technical and legal terms commonly encountered in challenges to breath and blood testing. Knowing these terms helps you understand reports, records, and courtroom discussions. The definitions below cover device calibration, chain of custody, specimen integrity, and laboratory procedures. These terms are important because they frame the standards and expectations that testing operators and laboratories must meet. When records are missing or inconsistent with these definitions, it may provide strong grounds for challenging test results in an Illinois DUI case.
Calibration refers to the routine procedures and checks performed to ensure a breath analyzer produces accurate readings within specified tolerances. Maintenance includes scheduled service, software updates, and repair logs that demonstrate the device was fit for use. Missing calibration records or irregular maintenance intervals can indicate unreliable readings. Defense review focuses on whether calibration occurred per manufacturer and agency schedules, whether standards used were appropriate, and whether any deviations were documented in a way that could affect the admissibility or weight of the test results.
Chain of custody is the documented trail showing who handled a blood sample from collection through analysis and storage. A complete chain of custody record helps establish that the sample tested in the laboratory is the same sample taken from the person arrested. Breaks in the chain, missing signatures, or unclear storage procedures can raise questions about sample contamination, mislabeling, or substitution. In a challenge, the defense scrutinizes these records to determine whether the prosecution can reliably link the test result to the defendant’s sample.
Operator procedure and training encompass the documented instructions, training records, and certifications that govern how law enforcement personnel administer breath tests and handle blood samples. Proper technique, including observing the subject before a breath test and following medical protocols for blood draws, is necessary to obtain valid results. Proof of inadequate training, missing logs, or deviations from protocol can support a challenge, as procedural errors may cause erroneous readings or compromise the integrity of a blood specimen.
Laboratory analysis and reporting cover the testing methods, instruments, quality control measures, and report formats used to determine blood alcohol concentration. Labs should follow standardized procedures, document controls, and note any anomalies in testing. Errors in reporting, unidentified peaks in chromatograms, or missing quality control data can call the reliability of blood test results into question. Defense review may include requesting raw data, laboratory worksheets, and validation records to detect inconsistencies or procedural lapses.
When deciding how to proceed, clients often choose between a focused challenge on a specific technical issue and a broader, more comprehensive investigation. A limited approach targets a single, clear weakness such as a missing calibration certificate or a broken chain of custody. That can be faster and less costly, but it may not address other problems that could surface later. A full investigation looks at all testing stages, seeks multiple records, and explores potential procedural and scientific faults comprehensively, offering a stronger overall defense but requiring more time and resources.
A targeted challenge can be appropriate when an obvious procedural defect appears in the early records, such as a missing breath machine calibration log or a blood sample with incomplete chain of custody documentation. If the record shows a single, decisive flaw that would likely lead to exclusion of test results, focusing on that issue can be efficient. This approach aims to quickly neutralize the prosecution’s strongest evidence while conserving resources, but it requires careful initial document review to confirm the singular nature of the defect.
Sometimes a client wants to resolve the case promptly and prefers a cost-conscious strategy that targets a specific, high-impact issue. A focused challenge can lead to rapid negotiation leverage or suppression in the right circumstances. This approach makes sense when the main goal is to avoid prolonged litigation, minimize immediate expenses, or expedite resolution for personal or professional reasons. Choosing this path requires clear communication about risks and the possibility that further problems could remain undiscovered without a broader inquiry.
A comprehensive investigation is appropriate when initial review suggests multiple potential weaknesses in testing, such as gaps in maintenance logs, inconsistent operator reports, and questionable lab documentation. Addressing a range of issues reduces the risk that the prosecution can rely on alternate records if one piece of evidence is excluded. This fuller approach increases the chance of favorable outcomes by building a layered defense that examines technical, procedural, and human factors influencing breath and blood test reliability.
When the stakes are higher, such as potential license suspension, significant fines, or impacts to employment, a full investigation may be warranted. Investing in thorough discovery and technical review can protect long-term interests and mobility rights. A detailed approach can uncover issues beyond the obvious, produce stronger arguments at hearings or trial, and provide a solid foundation for negotiation. In complex cases, a comprehensive review often yields better leverage and more reliable strategies for mitigating consequences.
A comprehensive review examines the entire testing process from initial contact through laboratory reporting, which can reveal interconnected problems that a narrow review might miss. By looking at maintenance logs, technician training, raw laboratory data, and chain of custody documents together, the defense can identify patterns of negligence or systemic issues. This depth of inquiry strengthens motions to suppress evidence or to challenge credibility at trial and supplies clearer evidence for negotiation, which can reduce charges or lead to dismissal in appropriate cases.
Beyond immediate case outcomes, a full approach provides clients with a clearer understanding of their legal position and the risks they face. It can preserve options for future appeals or post-conviction relief by developing a robust record early on. This method also tends to limit surprises during trial by addressing potential weaknesses proactively. While more resource-intensive, the comprehensive path often produces better long-term results and greater confidence in the defense strategy when facing breath and blood test-based DUI allegations.
Thorough review of testing records can provide the factual basis needed to file successful suppression motions or to form persuasive arguments during plea negotiations. Demonstrating multiple procedural or technical flaws undermines the prosecution’s narrative and offers tangible reasons to seek reduction or dismissal of charges. A stronger evidentiary posture gives defense counsel bargaining power and can avoid the uncertainties of trial. The resulting leverage frequently leads to more favorable outcomes for clients facing breath- or blood-based DUI allegations.
A comprehensive investigation reduces the risk of unexpected developments by addressing potential vulnerabilities before they surface at trial. It clarifies strengths and weaknesses so clients can make informed decisions about plea offers, motions, or trial. That clarity helps manage expectations and supports a consistent defense narrative. Additionally, developing a detailed factual record early on preserves options for appeal if necessary and gives clients a clear sense of direction and control throughout the legal process.
Keep copies of any paperwork you received and make notes while memories are fresh about what happened at the stop, any statements made, and the sequence of events. Ask for copies of reports and request the test records as soon as possible through counsel. Early preservation and prompt requests improve the chance of obtaining calibration logs, lab worksheets, and other records that may be altered or lost over time. Thorough documentation of the scene and interactions gives your defense a stronger starting point for building challenges.
Seek legal advice early so that discovery requests and preservation steps can be initiated without delay. Prompt engagement allows counsel to request calibration logs, operator training records, and raw lab data while they are still available. Early intervention also increases the chance to prepare for suppression hearings and to obtain medical or technical records that may support a challenge. Acting quickly provides time to investigate, consult with appropriate testing reviewers, and develop a strategy tailored to the specific facts of your case.
You should consider a challenge if any aspect of testing appears incomplete, inconsistent, or poorly documented. Missing calibration logs, unclear chain of custody, unusual lab notations, or discrepancies between officer reports and test printouts are all reasons to pursue review. Challenging results can reduce the prosecution’s leverage, lead to suppression of unreliable evidence, and open opportunities for reduced charges or dismissal. Even when test results exist, a careful challenge may highlight doubt about accuracy or proper handling that benefits your defense.
Another reason to pursue review is the long-term impact of a DUI conviction on insurance rates, employment, and driving privileges. Addressing testing issues early helps protect these interests by seeking the best possible outcome under the facts. A technical challenge can also bring attention to procedural failings that affect the fairness of the case. Whether you prioritize quick resolution or long-term protection, an informed review of breath and blood records supports decision-making that aligns with your personal and professional needs.
Typical circumstances prompting a challenge include missing or inconsistent device maintenance logs, breath test operator errors, improperly documented blood draws, delayed testing, and laboratory anomalies. Other triggers might be medical conditions that affect test results, evidence of sample contamination, or discrepancies between recorded observations and numerical readings. Identifying the relevant circumstances early allows counsel to prioritize records and target inquiries that reveal weaknesses in the prosecution’s reliance on breath or blood results.
If calibration or maintenance logs for a breath-testing device are missing, incomplete, or inconsistent with mandatory schedules, the reliability of breath results can be seriously questioned. A lack of documented calibration undermines the prosecution’s ability to show the device was within accepted tolerances at the time of testing. This problem is often a strong basis for suppression motions, as it directly affects the accuracy of the reported blood alcohol concentration and whether the device functioned as intended during the breath test.
Breaks or ambiguities in the chain of custody for a blood sample raise concerns about contamination, mislabeling, or substitution. Every person who handled the sample should be documented along with times and storage conditions. If signatures are missing, transfer steps unclear, or storage protocols not followed, the defense can argue that the tested sample may not accurately reflect the defendant’s blood at the time of collection. These gaps can significantly weaken the prosecution’s case when established in court.
Unusual laboratory findings, missing quality control data, or unexplained notations in toxicology reports can point to potential errors in analysis. Examples include chromatogram irregularities, absence of control runs, or inconsistent reporting formats. Such anomalies justify further inquiry into the lab’s procedures, test validation, and result interpretation. When labs cannot produce supporting raw data or quality control records, their reported blood alcohol numbers can be effectively challenged as unreliable or inadmissible.
If you are facing a DUI based on breath or blood results, timely legal assistance can make a significant difference. Frankfort Law Group will help you gather records, request laboratory files, and assess the testing procedures used in your case. We prioritize clear communication so you understand each step and the potential outcomes. Early investigation protects rights and preserves evidence, improving the chances of a favorable resolution. Call our office to learn how we can evaluate the specifics of your situation and begin gathering necessary documentation.
Frankfort Law Group focuses on trial work and has experience representing clients in DUI cases across Illinois, including disputes over breath and blood testing. We approach each case with a detailed review of records and a readiness to challenge procedural and technical issues that affect test reliability. Our attorneys aim to explain findings clearly, pursue appropriate motions, and advocate for the most favorable resolution possible in light of the facts. We emphasize practical strategies tailored to individual client priorities and circumstances.
Our team works promptly to obtain calibration logs, operator records, laboratory worksheets, and other critical documents that form the basis for a challenge. We coordinate discovery requests, prepare motions, and seek appropriate hearings when records suggest unreliable test results. We also communicate expected timelines and likely outcomes so clients can make informed choices about whether to pursue aggressive challenges or negotiate resolutions. Early action is particularly important for preserving evidence and ensuring proper review of technical materials.
Beyond technical review, our approach includes client-centered guidance on practical concerns like license issues, bond, and court scheduling. We help clients understand potential consequences, alternatives to trial, and the steps needed to protect driving privileges. Throughout the process, we maintain open lines of communication and work to build a defense that addresses both the legal and personal implications of a DUI charge involving breath or blood test results.
Our legal process begins with a prompt intake and records request, followed by a thorough review of available testing documentation and related reports. We identify potential weak points in the prosecution’s evidence, prepare targeted discovery requests, and consult with technical reviewers when necessary. If records show significant problems, we file motions to suppress or exclude the results. If not, we develop alternative strategies for negotiation or trial, always keeping clients informed of progress and legal options throughout the matter.
The first practical step is to preserve and request all relevant documents and data, including breath machine logs, operator notes, blood draw forms, hospital records, and lab worksheets. Timely requests ensure records are not lost or altered and give the defense the materials needed to evaluate the testing methods used. Early preservation and discovery set the foundation for any technical analysis, expert consultations, and motions that may follow, and they protect your ability to contest the reliability of chemical test results.
We submit formal discovery and administrative requests for maintenance and calibration logs, operator training records, breath test printouts, and full laboratory files. These records often include the raw data and quality control information necessary to evaluate how tests were performed. Obtaining complete files is critical for detecting inconsistencies, missing entries, or procedural departures. A careful review of these materials informs whether to pursue suppression motions and identifies the strongest avenues for challenging test reliability.
For blood tests, we seek hospital or collection center records, consent or authorization forms, and chain of custody documentation that show who handled the specimen and under what conditions. These materials help determine whether blood draws followed medical and laboratory protocols and whether samples were properly labeled and stored. We assess transfer logs, refrigeration records, and any notations about contamination or testing anomalies, all of which inform the defense strategy regarding the admissibility and reliability of blood analysis results.
After obtaining records, we perform a detailed technical review to identify possible grounds for challenge and to craft the appropriate legal strategy. This involves comparing procedures to manufacturer and laboratory standards, checking calibration intervals, and examining operator training and performance. If needed, we consult with qualified testing reviewers to interpret technical materials. Based on findings, we decide whether to seek suppression, negotiate, or prepare for trial with focused cross-examination plans aimed at undermining the prosecution’s reliance on test results.
We scrutinize calibration certificates, device error logs, lab quality control runs, and raw chromatograms or printouts to detect anomalies that could affect accuracy. This analysis may reveal instances where devices were outside tolerance, where control runs failed, or where lab reports lack supporting documentation. Identifying such discrepancies allows us to raise targeted legal arguments and to challenge the scientific reliability of the results in a hearing or at trial, thereby diminishing the prosecution’s primary evidence.
When records indicate significant flaws, we prepare suppression motions that articulate the legal and factual grounds for excluding test results. Preparation includes drafting affidavits, gathering supporting documentation, and outlining cross-examination themes for officers and lab personnel. We also prepare for evidentiary hearings by organizing documents and witness questions to demonstrate procedural failures or technical irregularities. Careful preparation improves the chance of favorable rulings and positions clients for better negotiation leverage if the prosecution seeks resolution.
Based on the outcome of discovery and hearings, we pursue the resolution best suited to the client’s goals. This may include negotiating a reduced charge, seeking dismissal, or taking the case to trial if suppression is denied or if there are other viable defenses. Throughout this stage we continue to evaluate evidence, prepare witness examinations, and refine legal arguments. Our focus remains on protecting driving privileges and minimizing long-term consequences while keeping clients informed and involved in decision-making.
When a negotiated outcome meets the client’s priorities, we use documented testing issues and procedural defects to secure reduced charges or alternative dispositions that limit penalties. Our approach balances the risks of trial with the likelihood of success at hearings, aiming to obtain the best practical result. Negotiations are informed by a full understanding of the records and any judicial rulings, and we advise clients on the short- and long-term implications of accepting a plea or alternative agreement.
If a trial is necessary, we build a courtroom strategy that highlights testing weaknesses and challenges the prosecution’s narrative about impairment. Trial preparation includes detailed witness examination plans, exhibits from testing records, and presentation of technical findings in plain language for the judge or jury. We focus on credibility, procedural defects, and the limitations of testing devices to create reasonable doubt about the reliability of breath or blood measurements, seeking an outcome that protects the client’s rights and future driving privileges.
At the Frankfort Law Group, we take great pride in our commitment to personal service. Clients come to us because they have problems, and they depend upon us to help them find solutions. We take these obligations seriously. When you meet with us, we know that you are only doing so because you need help. Since we started our firm in northeast Illinois, we have focused on providing each of our clients with personal attention. You do not have to be afraid to tell us your story. We are not here to judge you or make you feel ashamed for seeking help. Our only goal is to help you get results and move past your current legal problems.
At the Frankfort Law Group, we take great pride in our commitment to personal service. Clients come to us because they have problems, and they depend upon us to help them find solutions. We take these obligations seriously. When you meet with us, we know that you are only doing so because you need help. Since we started our firm in northeast Illinois, we have focused on providing each of our clients with personal attention. You do not have to be afraid to tell us your story. We are not here to judge you or make you feel ashamed for seeking help. Our only goal is to help you get results and move past your current legal problems.
Yes, breath or blood test results can be excluded in Illinois if the defense demonstrates material procedural or technical problems that undermine reliability or chain of custody. Courts may suppress results when required protocols were not followed, calibration records are missing, or laboratory reports are incomplete. Each case depends on the specific facts and available records, and successful suppression commonly requires detailed review of device logs, operator reports, and lab documentation. A timely and focused legal effort increases the chance of a favorable ruling from the court.The suppression process involves filing motions supported by the record and testimony showing deficiencies in testing. A hearing allows the defense to question the testing procedures and present evidence of irregularities. Judges evaluate whether the prosecution can meet its burden to prove the reliability of the results, and where significant gaps exist, the court may exclude those test results from evidence at trial.
When challenging a breath test, request calibration and maintenance logs for the device, operator training records, and the breath test printout or raw data. For blood tests, request the collection forms, chain of custody documentation, hospital or collection site notes, and the laboratory worksheets including quality control data. These records form the factual basis for identifying procedural lapses or technical anomalies. Early and thorough requests help preserve materials before they are lost or become harder to obtain.An attorney will know the specific documents to request and the proper formal discovery channels. Timely requests can also prompt preservation letters to agencies and labs to prevent destruction or alteration of records. Obtaining complete files allows for informed decisions about whether to pursue suppression, negotiate, or prepare for trial based on the strength of the evidence.
Chain of custody documents the path a blood sample takes from collection to analysis, including each transfer, handler identity, and storage conditions. A complete and unbroken chain is essential to tie the tested sample to the defendant. Missing signatures, unclear transfers, or improper storage conditions create reasonable doubt about whether the sample analyzed was the one collected, or whether it became contaminated or mislabeled during handling.Challenging chain of custody often focuses on locating gaps, inconsistencies, or unexplained delays in documentation. If the prosecution cannot satisfactorily explain the handling history of the specimen, the results may be rendered less credible or excluded. This is a common and powerful avenue for defense in blood test-based DUI cases.
Laboratory errors may include improper sample handling, failure of quality control measures, mislabeling, transcription mistakes, or analytical instrument problems. Sometimes labs lack complete validation records or cannot provide raw chromatograms and control run data to show tests were performed within acceptable parameters. These issues can create uncertainty about the reported blood alcohol concentration and the reliability of laboratory conclusions.When such errors are suspected, the defense seeks full laboratory files, control data, and chain of custody records. Reviewing these materials can expose procedural departures or gaps in documentation that weaken the probative value of blood test results and support motions to suppress or reduce reliance on the lab’s conclusions at trial.
Contacting a lawyer as soon as possible after a DUI arrest is important because key records and evidence may be time-sensitive. Early legal involvement helps ensure that calibration logs, lab worksheets, and other perishable documents are preserved and requested promptly. Immediate consultation also allows counsel to advise on administrative matters such as license suspension hearings and to begin building a defense strategy that protects short-term rights and long-term interests.A swift response increases the chance of obtaining complete records and retaining any available witnesses or resources needed for technical review. Delays can limit options and allow the prosecution to solidify its evidence, so early engagement with experienced trial lawyers focused on DUI matters often yields better results for clients facing breath or blood test challenges.
Refusing a breath test in Illinois triggers administrative consequences like license suspension under implied consent laws, which is separate from criminal prosecution. While refusal can limit the availability of a breath test result, prosecutors may still rely on other evidence such as blood tests, field observations, or other indicators. The decision to refuse should be discussed with counsel, and the administrative and criminal consequences carefully weighed based on circumstances and priorities.In some cases a refusal may lead to strategic considerations in defense planning, but it does not automatically prevent criminal charges or prosecution. Legal advice early on helps evaluate whether refusal was beneficial or detrimental in context and informs subsequent steps to challenge any remaining evidence against you.
Yes, certain medical conditions and physiological factors can affect breathalyzer readings, including conditions that alter breath composition or cause mouth alcohol presence. Factors like acid reflux, certain dental conditions, or recent use of mouthwash and breath sprays may skew breath test results. These conditions may produce falsely elevated readings if not properly accounted for by testing procedures, and identifying them can be an important part of a defense strategy.Documenting medical conditions and contemporaneous circumstances provides a basis for questioning the validity of breath test results. Defense counsel will seek medical records and may consult with qualified reviewers to determine whether a medical factor plausibly affected the test outcome and whether that issue supports legal challenges to the reliability of the breathalyzer reading.
A suppression hearing is a court proceeding where the defense asks the judge to exclude certain evidence from trial, often on the grounds that it was obtained in violation of law or is unreliable. In the context of breath and blood tests, a suppression hearing allows the defense to present evidence and argument that testing procedures were flawed, records incomplete, or chain of custody defective enough to render the results inadmissible. The judge considers the legal standards and factual record before ruling on whether the evidence may be used at trial.Preparation for a suppression hearing requires careful collection of testing records, witness preparation, and presentation of technical findings in accessible language for the court. Successful suppression can significantly alter the prosecution’s case by removing scientific evidence that supports impairment allegations, and it is often a central strategy in challenging breath or blood test results.
The time required to review testing records depends on the scope of discovery and the volume of materials. Initial review of basic records may take a few days to identify obvious issues, while a comprehensive technical review that includes laboratory files, calibration logs, and raw data can take several weeks. If expert consultation or additional requests are needed, that timeline may extend further. Prompt requests and cooperation from agencies shorten the process, while delays in producing records can slow defense preparation.Clients should expect regular updates from counsel about progress and timelines. Early engagement and active record requests speed the review process and make it more likely that important time-sensitive documents are preserved and analyzed in time to support motions or hearings.
Frankfort Law Group assists by promptly requesting and reviewing testing records, identifying procedural and technical issues, and forming a strategy for suppression, negotiation, or trial as appropriate. We handle administrative preservation steps, coordinate discovery requests, and prepare motions that articulate the defenses to breath and blood evidence. Our trial-focused approach ensures that findings are presented clearly to judges and juries, and that the client’s goals guide decision-making throughout the case.We also communicate practical considerations about license implications, potential penalties, and likely timelines, helping clients make informed choices. Early engagement increases the likelihood of preserving critical records and developing the strongest possible defense to chemical test-based DUI allegations in Illinois.