Found guilty after lab results challenged

A Hempstead man accused of causing a fatal car crash while driving drunk was acquitted of the top charge against him, but convicted of a lesser charge Tuesday in a case where the defense challenged the accuracy of blood-alcohol testing at the Nassau Police Crime Lab.

It was the first verdict in a drunken driving case since the lab was closed in February after being put on probation by a national accreditation agency for multiple problems. They included a failure to properly calibrate the lab's instrument that measures alcohol in blood.

Jonathan Davis, 24, was acquitted of second-degree manslaughter, but convicted of second-degree vehicular manslaughter after prosecutors said he was speeding in Uniondale in September 2009 and crashed into Ken Noel, who was driving home after his shift as a nurse in a local nursing home.

Davis faces a maximum of 3 1/2 to 7 years in prison at his June 3 sentencing.

At his trial, Davis' defense attorney, Joseph LoPiccolo of Garden City, said that the lab's calibration issues, along with other problems there, made the evidence against Davis unreliable.

"The evidence was suspect, and it showed in the verdict," LoPiccolo said, adding that he believed the verdict was a compromise because some jurors didn't believe the lab evidence. He said jurors told his associates after the verdict that lab issues were a factor in their decision.

But Nassau District Attorney Kathleen Rice disagreed, saying in a statement, "The jury rejected the defense argument that all evidence generated by the NCPD lab is tainted and unreliable."

"We were able to prove that the science was accurate in this case. The jury by its verdict agreed," said Rice, whose office is reviewing blood-alcohol evidence in 3,000 cases. More than a dozen drunken driving cases are being challenged in court over the issue.

The prosecution presented other evidence that Davis was intoxicated, including police observations that he had bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, an odor of alcohol and was unsteady on his feet.

For a conviction on vehicular manslaughter, the prosecution has to prove the defendant was drunk, among other things.

Prosecutors also argued the lab's failure to calibrate the instrument would not have affected blood-alcohol results.