State v. Overmeyer, 2015 Ohio 4479

Overmeyer was operating a motor vehicle in Licking County on December 13, 2014.
A trooper observed him and he provided a breath sample showing 0.081 BAC.
The BAC Datamaster calibration is claimed to have ±0.003 error and Overmeyer's sample was within 0.003 of the limit.
Overmeyer was charged with two counts of OVI; one count (A)(1)(a) was dismissed before trial.
The case proceeded to a bench trial after a stipulation to the evidence, with in limine rulings excluding impairment defense and calibration margin evidence.
The trial court convicted Overmeyer of the prohibited level offense (R.C. 4511.19(A)(1)(d)) and sentenced accordingly.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred by excluding impairment and calibration-margin evidence	Overmeyer contends he should present lack-of-impairment and margin-of-error evidence.	Overmeyer (defendant) asserts the evidence is admissible to rebut the presumption and testing reliability.	No reversible error; evidentiary rulings within trial court discretion; no abuse shown.

State v. French, 72 Ohio St.3d 446 (1995) (limits on suppressing BAC test grounds; trial evidence admissible under Rules of Evidence)
State v. Vega, 12 Ohio St.3d 185 (1984) (defendant may introduce rebuttable evidence of sobriety and test reliability)
O'Brien v. Angley, 63 Ohio St.2d 159 (1980) (trial court evidentiary decisions reviewed for abuse of discretion)
Beard v. Meridia Huron Hosp., 106 Ohio St.3d 237 (2005) (reversible error requires substantial rights effect or lack of substantial justice)
State v. Sommer, 2005-Ohio-1707 (Ohio) (calibration data controls accuracy; design specs alone insufficient)