OUI Dismissed: .27 Breath Test Excluded After 13-Year-Old Conviction Vacated Under Commonwealth v. Hallinan
By Attorney Michael Patrick Murray | April 15, 2026
On Wednesday, April 15, 2026, charges of Operating a Motor Vehicle While Under the Influence of Alcohol (OUI) against my client were dismissed on the day of trial in Commonwealth v. Defendant, Docket No. 1362 CR 9187 — despite a recorded breath test result of .27, more than three times the legal limit.
This case was thirteen years old. My client had been living with this conviction for over a decade. But a landmark 2023 decision from the Supreme Judicial Court changed everything — and gave my client a second chance that did not exist when the original plea was entered.
Commonwealth v. Hallinan and the Alcotest 9510 Scandal
This dismissal was secured through a Motion to Withdraw Plea and for a New Trial filed pursuant to Commonwealth v. Hallinan, 491 Mass. 730 (2023). In Hallinan, the Supreme Judicial Court held that individuals who “pleaded guilty or who were convicted after trial, and the evidence against whom included breath test results from an Alcotest 9510 device last calibrated and certified prior to April 18, 2019,” are “entitled to a conclusive presumption of egregious government misconduct.”
What this means in plain terms: if your OUI conviction was based on a breath test from one of these devices, the court will vacate your prior judgment and grant you a new trial. In the new trial, the breath test result is excluded. And critically, you face no additional penalty.
What Happened in This Case
My client was originally convicted of OUI based on a .27 breath test result from an Alcotest 9510 device. The conviction had been on my client’s record for thirteen years. We filed the Hallinan motion, the court vacated the original plea, and a new trial was ordered with the breath test excluded.
On the day of the new trial, the Commonwealth was unable to proceed. After thirteen years, the passage of time had made it impossible to produce witnesses. The case was dismissed.
This is not unusual in Hallinan cases. The decision creates a pathway for defendants to reopen convictions that are years or even decades old. In many of these older cases, the Commonwealth simply cannot retry the case because witnesses have moved, retired, or are otherwise unavailable. The result is a dismissal — and a conviction that disappears from the defendant’s record.
The Real-World Impact: From a Five-Year License Loss to Forty-Five Days
The stakes in this case went far beyond the thirteen-year-old conviction itself. My client was facing a separate, subsequent OUI charge. Under Massachusetts law, a second-offense OUI carries dramatically harsher penalties than a first offense — including a mandatory minimum five-year loss of license.
By vacating and dismissing the prior conviction under Hallinan, the subsequent charge was no longer a “second offense.” It became a first offense. The penalty exposure dropped from a mandatory minimum five-year license suspension to a forty-five-day license loss. That is the difference between losing your ability to drive for five years and being back on the road in six weeks.
This is why Hallinan matters so much to anyone facing second or subsequent offense OUI charges. If the prior conviction can be vacated, the entire penalty structure changes. Mandatory minimums disappear. Jail exposure drops. License suspensions shrink. The case transforms from a catastrophic outcome to a manageable one.
Two Hallinan Wins in One Week
This was the second Hallinan-based dismissal I secured for this same client in a single week. On April 15, 2026, Docket No. 1362 CR 9187 (.27 breath test) was dismissed. On April 17, 2026, Docket No. 1167 CR 0971 (.21 breath test, second offense) was also dismissed. Together, these two dismissals eliminated the prior conviction that was driving the enhanced penalties and restored my client’s driving privileges.
Does Hallinan Apply to Your Case?
If you were convicted of OUI in Massachusetts — whether by guilty plea or after trial — and the evidence against you included a breath test from an Alcotest 9510 device that was last calibrated before April 18, 2019, you may be entitled to have your conviction vacated and a new trial ordered. This is true regardless of how long ago the conviction occurred.
This becomes especially critical if you are currently facing a second or subsequent offense OUI charge. A prior conviction that can be vacated under Hallinan may be the difference between a mandatory minimum prison sentence and a manageable outcome. You face no additional penalty for reopening the prior case — there is no risk, only opportunity.
About Attorney Michael Patrick Murray
Attorney Michael Patrick Murray is a Massachusetts criminal defense attorney with over 30 years of experience and an 80% trial success rate. He has handled thousands of OUI cases across the Commonwealth and has successfully filed multiple Hallinan motions to vacate prior convictions and reduce penalty exposure for his clients.
If you have a prior OUI conviction that may be eligible for relief under Hallinan, or if you are facing second or subsequent offense OUI charges, contact the Law Office of Michael Patrick Murray, P.C. at (508) 393-4162 for a consultation.
The Law Office of Michael Patrick Murray, P.C. is located in Northborough, Massachusetts and represents clients in OUI and criminal defense matters throughout Worcester County, Middlesex County, Norfolk County, Essex County, and across the Commonwealth.