State of New Jersey v. Scott Campbell, 436 N.J. Super. 264

Campbell was stopped for DWI in Hamilton Township, Atlantic County; Alcotest showed BAC of .12%.
Prosecution charged under N.J.S.A. 39:4-50(a) with per se BAC at or above .08%.
Defendant moved to suppress Alcotest results; Law Division denied declaratory relief; appeal preserved issue.
Alcotest admissibility requires clear-and-convincing proof of the three Chun prerequisites (device in order, operator certified, proper administration).
Court recognized per se framework but maintained that guilt beyond a reasonable doubt must be proven at trial, regardless of admissibility standard.
Court affirmed conviction and remanded for sentencing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Constitutionality of BAC admissibility standard	Campbell argues clear-and-convincing standard undermines beyond-a-reasonable-doubt burden	Campbell contends per se BAC proof is constitutionally invalid	No constitutional flaw; State's burden remains beyond reasonable doubt
Effect of Chun prerequisites on guilt proof	State must prove BAC via Chun prerequisites before admission	Clear-and-convincing admissibility could bias outcome	Admissibility controlled by Chun; ultimate guilt by beyond-doubt standard remains
Relation between admissibility standard and final verdict	Admission of BAC evidence could determine guilt irrespective of trial	Trial can offset with weight/credibility assessments	Final guilt beyond reasonable doubt required; admissibility does not override standard

State v. Tischio, 107 N.J. 504 (1987) (per se BAC proof; no extrapolation dair)
Romano v. Kimmelman, 96 N.J. 66 (1984) (three Chun prerequisites for admissibility (device, inspection, procedure))
State v. Chun, 194 N.J. 54 (2008) (Alcotest reliable; three conditions for admissibility)
State v. Ugrovics, 410 N.J. Super. 482 (2009) (clear-and-convincing standard for Alcotest admissibility)