In State v. Terry, C.A. No. 1209012999, (Del. Super. July 18, 2013), the defendant filed a motion to suppress, challenging the validity of the DUI checkpoint 11 The defendant argued that the State failed to prove that the DUI checkpoint was created and operated in accordance with the policy guidelines of the Delaware State Police. The Terry defendant sent a letter requesting statistical information supporting the establishment of the DUI checkpoint; however, the State failed to produce the requested information. The court granted the defendants motion to suppress, and explained: "The law is clear that the State . . . must demonstrate compliance with certain important procedural requirements as part of any sobriety checkpoint DUI prosecution. The Court does not believe that denying Mr. Terry an opportunity to test the adequacy of the foundation set forth in the declaration is harmless error. . . . DRE 902(11)(C) places the burden of notification of intent to use written declarations and to provide adequate information regarding the purported business records on the proffering party - here, the State. The State did not do this and, thus, prevented Mr. Terry from fair opportunity to challenge the 902(11) Declaration." (Id. at 11.)