Kenneth Ballard v. State of Alaska, 576 P.3d 686

Kenneth S. Ballard was convicted by a jury of driving under the influence based on a DataMaster breathalyzer test showing a 0.134% blood alcohol content.
The State introduced two calibration reports for the DataMaster and a printout of Ballard’s test results at trial, relying on foundational requirements to admit these documents as evidence.
Ballard objected to the admission of calibration reports, arguing a records custodian or qualified witness was required under the business records hearsay exception.
Ballard also sought to introduce DataMaster maintenance records through the arresting officer to challenge the reliability of the test, but the court denied admission due to lack of proper foundation.
The conviction was appealed, focusing on evidence admissibility issues regarding calibration and maintenance records.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of Calibration Reports	Needed foundation from a records custodian under business records exception	Public records exception applies; reports are self-authenticating	Reports admissible under public records exception and self-authenticating
Admissibility of Maintenance Records	Should be admitted under business records exception via officer witness	Officer lacked personal knowledge; not proper foundation	Court did not err; foundation requirement not met
Admissibility of DataMaster Printout	Printout was inadmissible as a business record	Statute presumes validity if procedural requirements met	Evidence rules allow admission; further foundation unnecessary

State v. Huggins, 659 P.2d 613 (Alaska App. 1982) (Breathalyzer calibration records are admissible under the public records exception and self-authenticating)
Wassillie v. State, 411 P.3d 595 (Alaska 2018) (Clarifies foundation requirements for business records exception)
Thompson v. State, 210 P.3d 1233 (Alaska App. 2009) (Standard of review for foundation rulings)