In an unpublished decision issued Sept 14, 2011 in State v Carlson, the App Div remanded a DWI for a hearing on whether the State’s routine destruction of the calibration files when downloading digital data amounted to a Brady violation. The issue was not the routine digital data which it was agreed was supplied. The back story not before this court is that the State claims that a software glitch will prevent proper operation if the calibration files are not deleted and that the paper files are all the info a def needs anyway. However, Dr Baum testified (in that other matter) that one of the things destroyed in the process is the tolerance employed, certainly a critical fact which is now routinely destroyed by the NJSP. The case stands for the proposition that an evidentiary hearing must be held to determine whether the destruction amounts to a Brady violation.