[ARCHIVED THREAD] - DUI question for LEOs (Page 1 of 5)
Posted: 12/2/2011 8:18:12 AM EDT
| I was watching one of the cop shows last night and they were stopping people for suspected DUI. They could smell alcohol on people and then would run the field sobriety test and then do the breathalyzer. If you can smell the alcohol, why do the field sobriety test first and then do the breathalyzer? Why not just go straight to the breathalyzer and be on your way? Why waste the time to do the walk the line, count backwards, etc? |
|
Building a case. The breathalyzer (especially the portable) can (and often is) disputed by those fighting the charges. The additional roadside sobriety tests simply give more evidence to make the charges stick. I'm not LEO, but I did sleep in a Holiday Inn last night. |
|
Quoted: I was watching one of the cop shows last night and they were stopping people for suspected DUI. They could smell alcohol on people and then would run the field sobriety test and then do the breathalyzer. If you can smell the alcohol, why do the field sobriety test first and then do the breathalyzer? Why not just go straight to the breathalyzer and be on your way? Why waste the time to do the walk the line, count backwards, etc? That right there is your answer  Speed |
|
A good lawyer would recommend that you decline, of course you forfeit your license for a period and they may still get a warrant for alcohol testing and compel participation, but at least you aren't giving them what they need to nail the case shut.
Even if you are stone cold sober, I can't see how a FST would help you, seems that once a cop has it on his mind you are impaired he's gonna follow through with it to get you. I'm sure some LEOs will say that isn't the case, and it makes perfect sense for a cop to back off when he sees evidence his initial suspicion was wrong, but there isn't any way to know he will, why give them the ammo to use against you? I'd give up my license and continue to drive until I got it back, no shit. I've only been pulled over 1 time in the last 10 years, it's a good bet I could go 6 months without any interaction. FWIW, I barely drink and don't drink and drive ever. This is my hypothetical were I suspected. Lawyer advice seems sound to me. |
|
Quoted:
Why waste the time to do the walk the line, count backwards, etc? Don't know, I don't make DUI arrests.
Quoted:
A good lawyer would recommend that you decline, of course you forfeit your license for a period and they may still get a warrant for alcohol testing and compel participation, but at least you aren't giving them what they need to nail the case shut. This. Here in NY refuse all tests every time. |
|
Quoted:
So if I blew a .09 and did the fst's with flying colors. Still got a dui. Would I have a good chance at winning the case if I took it to trial? If you blew a .09 on a calibrated machine and your states limit is .08% BAC then no, you'd still be charged with that. But the point is, if you truly passed the SFSTs with flying colors, you never should have been put on the box. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: So if I blew a .09 and did the fst's with flying colors. Still got a dui. Would I have a good chance at winning the case if I took it to trial? Maybe, maybe not. .08 is the per se limit here. Same here, but I understand that there could be a .02 variance in a breathalyzer test. If the defendant does the fst's with flying colors, then they probably couldn't use that as credible evidence against them. So one would be left with justifying the breathalyzer as accurate enough to convict the defendant. Which seems plausible with a good lawyer. Idk. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why waste the time to do the walk the line, count backwards, etc? Don't know, I don't make DUI arrests.
Quoted:
A good lawyer would recommend that you decline, of course you forfeit your license for a period and they may still get a warrant for alcohol testing and compel participation, but at least you aren't giving them what they need to nail the case shut. This. Here in NY refuse all tests every time. Here's a question, hopefully an LEO or Lawyer will chime in. What happens to the license of an out of state driver that refuses DUI tests? I'm from TN, and I get pulled over in NYS, the cop wants me to perform FST and blow and I refuse. Does NYS confiscate my DL on the spot? Of course they'll get a warrant for blood draw, but I'm assuming I'm 100% clean because if I'm behind the wheel I will be. |
|
Quoted:
What if the person can't walk like everyone else. Handicapped and walks like he is drunk but passes breath test? If they are handicapped, you do the tests that are fair to them. If you have one leg, there is no point in doing the one leg stance. If you have one eye, it is not worth doing the HGN. If you are in a wheelchair, there is no point in the walk and turn. |
|
Quoted: Regarding field sobriety tests, how valid are they when the person has physical handicaps, such as prosthetic joints or arthritis in the lower body? The officer should ask if the suspect has any conditions which would make it hard for them to do the FST's. Somebody with bad knees you might not ask them to do the walk and turn, but would still have them do the Rhomberg Modified. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why waste the time to do the walk the line, count backwards, etc? Don't know, I don't make DUI arrests.
Quoted:
A good lawyer would recommend that you decline, of course you forfeit your license for a period and they may still get a warrant for alcohol testing and compel participation, but at least you aren't giving them what they need to nail the case shut. This. Here in NY refuse all tests every time. Here's a question, hopefully an LEO or Lawyer will chime in. What happens to the license of an out of state driver that refuses DUI tests? I'm from TN, and I get pulled over in NYS, the cop wants me to perform FST and blow and I refuse. Does NYS confiscate my DL on the spot? Of course they'll get a warrant for blood draw, but I'm assuming I'm 100% clean because if I'm behind the wheel I will be. I can't speak for other NY departments but we're not allowed to confiscate out of state driver's licenses here. Also, no warrants for blood draw here unless it's a MAJOR accident with serious life threatening injuries or fatalities. |
|
I profoundly pissed off a female LEO by insisting that she give me the breathalyzer right off.
Was tired, pissed off and wanted to go home and go to bed. Since I hadn't had a drink for a few weeks I was pretty confident I would pass it. She finally realized I was dead sober and sent me on my way, no ticket, no FST, no breathalyzer. |
|
Quoted:
What if the person can't walk like everyone else. Handicapped and walks like he is drunk but passes breath test? Part of the SFSTs is to ask the person if they have any physical handicaps or issues which would prevent them from taking or interfere with them performing the tests. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Why waste the time to do the walk the line, count backwards, etc? Don't know, I don't make DUI arrests. Quoted: A good lawyer would recommend that you decline, of course you forfeit your license for a period and they may still get a warrant for alcohol testing and compel participation, but at least you aren't giving them what they need to nail the case shut. This. Here in NY refuse all tests every time. In Arizona this can backfire on you. Refusal to take a test can be used against you in trial as evidence that you knew you were impaired and shouldn't be driving. That's why you didn't want to take the test. Plus, it's hard not to be able to find a phleb to draw your blood. Telephonic warrants don't take long to get. |
|
Quoted:
A good lawyer would recommend that you decline, of course you forfeit your license for a period and they may still get a warrant for alcohol testing and compel participation, but at least you aren't giving them what they need to nail the case shut. Even if you are stone cold sober, I can't see how a FST would help you, seems that once a cop has it on his mind you are impaired he's gonna follow through with it to get you. I'm sure some LEOs will say that isn't the case, and it makes perfect sense for a cop to back off when he sees evidence his initial suspicion was wrong, but there isn't any way to know he will, why give them the ammo to use against you? I'd give up my license and continue to drive until I got it back, no shit. I've only been pulled over 1 time in the last 10 years, it's a good bet I could go 6 months without any interaction. FWIW, I barely drink and don't drink and drive ever. This is my hypothetical were I suspected. Lawyer advice seems sound to me. If you refuse to test you lose your license, so what's the advantage? Is it just so you don't have the DUI on your record? What does it show up as if you refuse? |
|
Quoted:
Here's a question, hopefully an LEO or Lawyer will chime in. What happens to the license of an out of state driver that refuses DUI tests? I'm from TN, and I get pulled over in NYS, the cop wants me to perform FST and blow and I refuse. Does NYS confiscate my DL on the spot? Of course they'll get a warrant for blood draw, but I'm assuming I'm 100% clean because if I'm behind the wheel I will be. Out of state DLs won't be confiscated. The state you are in will revoke/suspend your right to drive in that state. With an interstate compact (which almost all states are involved), you will lose your license in your state, for a term determined by your state or by the state where the offense occurred. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why waste the time to do the walk the line, count backwards, etc? Don't know, I don't make DUI arrests.
Quoted:
A good lawyer would recommend that you decline, of course you forfeit your license for a period and they may still get a warrant for alcohol testing and compel participation, but at least you aren't giving them what they need to nail the case shut. This. Here in NY refuse all tests every time. In Arizona this can backfire on you. Refusal to take a test can be used against you in trial as evidence that you knew you were impaired and shouldn't be driving. That's why you didn't want to take the test. Plus, it's hard not to be able to find a phleb to draw your blood. Telephonic warrants don't take long to get. All it gets you here is a 1 year suspension of your license. Also, we don't do warrants for blood often. (see above post) |
|
Quoted:
Here's a question, hopefully an LEO or Lawyer will chime in. What happens to the license of an out of state driver that refuses DUI tests? I'm from TN, and I get pulled over in NYS, the cop wants me to perform FST and blow and I refuse. Does NYS confiscate my DL on the spot? Of course they'll get a warrant for blood draw, but I'm assuming I'm 100% clean because if I'm behind the wheel I will be. Hah, no one is getting a warrant for blood for a run of the mill DWI arrest, not in NY |
|
Quoted: Quoted: So if I blew a .09 and did the fst's with flying colors. Still got a dui. Would I have a good chance at winning the case if I took it to trial? If you blew a .09 on a calibrated machine and your states limit is .08% BAC then no, you'd still be charged with that. But the point is, if you truly passed the SFSTs with flying colors, you never should have been put on the box. I gotcha, but I don't think the cop would be like "ok you can go" after a person passed fst's. It seems to me they would just further their investigation with more fst's or a breathalyzer until they find some evidence, and if not, let them go, maybe. Not bashing cops. Don't drink and drive and you wont get a dui. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why waste the time to do the walk the line, count backwards, etc? Don't know, I don't make DUI arrests.
Quoted:
A good lawyer would recommend that you decline, of course you forfeit your license for a period and they may still get a warrant for alcohol testing and compel participation, but at least you aren't giving them what they need to nail the case shut. This. Here in NY refuse all tests every time. In Arizona this can backfire on you. Refusal to take a test can be used against you in trial as evidence that you knew you were impaired and shouldn't be driving. That's why you didn't want to take the test. Plus, it's hard not to be able to find a phleb to draw your blood. Telephonic warrants don't take long to get. So in direct violation of the 5th ammendment you are supposedly testifying against your self by not testifying against yourself. AZ has somethings dead right (constitutional carry), and others are  .
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
A good lawyer would recommend that you decline, of course you forfeit your license for a period and they may still get a warrant for alcohol testing and compel participation, but at least you aren't giving them what they need to nail the case shut. Even if you are stone cold sober, I can't see how a FST would help you, seems that once a cop has it on his mind you are impaired he's gonna follow through with it to get you. I'm sure some LEOs will say that isn't the case, and it makes perfect sense for a cop to back off when he sees evidence his initial suspicion was wrong, but there isn't any way to know he will, why give them the ammo to use against you? I'd give up my license and continue to drive until I got it back, no shit. I've only been pulled over 1 time in the last 10 years, it's a good bet I could go 6 months without any interaction. FWIW, I barely drink and don't drink and drive ever. This is my hypothetical were I suspected. Lawyer advice seems sound to me. If you refuse to test you lose your license, so what's the advantage? Is it just so you don't have the DUI on your record? What does it show up as if you refuse? Here it shows up as suspension for refusal. I'd rather have that over a DUI conviction. Every person I know who's refused the testing has either beaten it or had it plea bargained down to a much lesser charge. Quoted:
Quoted:
Here's a question, hopefully an LEO or Lawyer will chime in. What happens to the license of an out of state driver that refuses DUI tests? I'm from TN, and I get pulled over in NYS, the cop wants me to perform FST and blow and I refuse. Does NYS confiscate my DL on the spot? Of course they'll get a warrant for blood draw, but I'm assuming I'm 100% clean because if I'm behind the wheel I will be. Hah, no one is getting a warrant for blood for a run of the mill DWI arrest, not in NY This. |
|
Actually, I believe there is a law on the books about having a drink within 30 minutes of operating a motor vehicle. It's one of those charges they can tack on.
I was a juror in a DUI case where this came up (and it was one count we found the guy guilty of). The officers blew the field sobriety test, so he was not charged with driving while impaired. don't know if it was a City or state law - this was Chandler Municipal Court. Quoted:
In most states the PBT isn't admissable in court. And drinking and driving isn't illegal. Being under the influence is. So you have to have evidence that they are under the influence. That is what the FST's show. |
|
Quoted: 1 year is a pretty long time to be without a license, particularly if you're not on public assistance. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Why waste the time to do the walk the line, count backwards, etc? Don't know, I don't make DUI arrests. Quoted: A good lawyer would recommend that you decline, of course you forfeit your license for a period and they may still get a warrant for alcohol testing and compel participation, but at least you aren't giving them what they need to nail the case shut. This. Here in NY refuse all tests every time. In Arizona this can backfire on you. Refusal to take a test can be used against you in trial as evidence that you knew you were impaired and shouldn't be driving. That's why you didn't want to take the test. Plus, it's hard not to be able to find a phleb to draw your blood. Telephonic warrants don't take long to get. All it gets you here is a 1 year suspension of your license. Also, we don't do warrants for blood often. (see above post) |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why waste the time to do the walk the line, count backwards, etc? Don't know, I don't make DUI arrests.
Quoted:
A good lawyer would recommend that you decline, of course you forfeit your license for a period and they may still get a warrant for alcohol testing and compel participation, but at least you aren't giving them what they need to nail the case shut. This. Here in NY refuse all tests every time. Here's a question, hopefully an LEO or Lawyer will chime in. What happens to the license of an out of state driver that refuses DUI tests? I'm from TN, and I get pulled over in NYS, the cop wants me to perform FST and blow and I refuse. Does NYS confiscate my DL on the spot? Of course they'll get a warrant for blood draw, but I'm assuming I'm 100% clean because if I'm behind the wheel I will be. I know of one state where a refusal is an automatic DL suspension. If you're out state, the DMV issues you a license and then revokes it. In theory, due to the Interstate Compact, if you're suspended in one state, you're suspended in your home state. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
A good lawyer would recommend that you decline, of course you forfeit your license for a period and they may still get a warrant for alcohol testing and compel participation, but at least you aren't giving them what they need to nail the case shut. Even if you are stone cold sober, I can't see how a FST would help you, seems that once a cop has it on his mind you are impaired he's gonna follow through with it to get you. I'm sure some LEOs will say that isn't the case, and it makes perfect sense for a cop to back off when he sees evidence his initial suspicion was wrong, but there isn't any way to know he will, why give them the ammo to use against you? I'd give up my license and continue to drive until I got it back, no shit. I've only been pulled over 1 time in the last 10 years, it's a good bet I could go 6 months without any interaction. FWIW, I barely drink and don't drink and drive ever. This is my hypothetical were I suspected. Lawyer advice seems sound to me. If you refuse to test you lose your license, so what's the advantage? Is it just so you don't have the DUI on your record? What does it show up as if you refuse? It's a measured risk. If I didn't have my license, it's a big so what, I haven't needed it but one time in the last 10 years. If I have to get a lawyer to defend myself against a charge because I was clumsy at the wrong moment on video that costs me a hell of a lot more. YMMV. I have zero expectation of being accused, but if I ever am, I don't see how "cooperating" can do anything but hurt me and cost me money. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
1 year is a pretty long time to be without a license, particularly if you're not on public assistance. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why waste the time to do the walk the line, count backwards, etc? Don't know, I don't make DUI arrests.
Quoted:
A good lawyer would recommend that you decline, of course you forfeit your license for a period and they may still get a warrant for alcohol testing and compel participation, but at least you aren't giving them what they need to nail the case shut. This. Here in NY refuse all tests every time. In Arizona this can backfire on you. Refusal to take a test can be used against you in trial as evidence that you knew you were impaired and shouldn't be driving. That's why you didn't want to take the test. Plus, it's hard not to be able to find a phleb to draw your blood. Telephonic warrants don't take long to get. All it gets you here is a 1 year suspension of your license. Also, we don't do warrants for blood often. (see above post) Not if you don't care about driving around suspended, which most people around here don't. I know a guy whose been suspended for over a decade and has been arrested for DUI five times, he's not done one day in jail. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Why waste the time to do the walk the line, count backwards, etc? Don't know, I don't make DUI arrests. Quoted: A good lawyer would recommend that you decline, of course you forfeit your license for a period and they may still get a warrant for alcohol testing and compel participation, but at least you aren't giving them what they need to nail the case shut. This. Here in NY refuse all tests every time. In Arizona this can backfire on you. Refusal to take a test can be used against you in trial as evidence that you knew you were impaired and shouldn't be driving. That's why you didn't want to take the test. Plus, it's hard not to be able to find a phleb to draw your blood. Telephonic warrants don't take long to get. So in direct violation of the 5th ammendment you are supposedly testifying against your self by not testifying against yourself. AZ has somethings dead right (constitutional carry), and others are .Arizona law is that in return for giving you a license to drive, you give up the right to not give a chemical test if an officers has probable cause to believe you are DUI. 28-1388. Blood and breath tests; violation; classification; admissible evidence D. If a person under arrest refuses to submit to a test or tests under section 28-1321, whether or not a sample was collected pursuant to subsection E of this section or a search warrant, evidence of refusal is admissible in any civil or criminal action or other proceeding. The issue of refusal is an issue of fact to be determined by the trier of fact in all cases. |
|
Quoted: Not if you don't care about driving around suspended, which most people around here don't. I don't necessarily, but getting pinched for it (shit happens, even when you're driving around with a halo over your head) makes getting it back a year later all that much harder. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not if you don't care about driving around suspended, which most people around here don't. I don't necessarily, but getting pinched for it (shit happens, even when you're driving around with a halo over your head) makes getting it back a year later all that much harder. Very rare to get pulled over here. Our city and county cops are probably the laziest in the US. |
|
What's troubling to me is that if you envoke your 5th amendment protection and refuse to incriminate yourself by failing a breathalizer or stumbling around on a dash cam, you are still subject to criminal sanctions, which here, are almost worse than a 1st offense DUI.
Without you incriminating yourself by willfully submitting to and subsequently failing the tests, it would be hard to get a conviction. I guess I am confused by how its legal to get in trouble for pleading the 5th. I have to wonder if these laws have been argued before a higher court to challenge the legality... |
|
Quoted:
What's troubling to me is that if you envoke your 5th amendment protection and refuse to incriminate yourself by failing a breathalizer or stumbling around on a dash cam, you are still subject to criminal sanctions, which here, are almost worse than a 1st offense DUI. Without you incriminating yourself by willfully submitting to and subsequently failing the tests, it would be hard to get a conviction. I guess I am confused by how its legal to get in trouble for pleading the 5th. I have to wonder if these laws have been argued before a higher court to challenge the legality... That's probably why the "punishments" are painfull but far less so than the hundreds of thousands of dollars it would take to challenge the laws up the appeals ladder. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: A good lawyer would recommend that you decline, of course you forfeit your license for a period and they may still get a warrant for alcohol testing and compel participation, but at least you aren't giving them what they need to nail the case shut. Even if you are stone cold sober, I can't see how a FST would help you, seems that once a cop has it on his mind you are impaired he's gonna follow through with it to get you. I'm sure some LEOs will say that isn't the case, and it makes perfect sense for a cop to back off when he sees evidence his initial suspicion was wrong, but there isn't any way to know he will, why give them the ammo to use against you? I'd give up my license and continue to drive until I got it back, no shit. I've only been pulled over 1 time in the last 10 years, it's a good bet I could go 6 months without any interaction. FWIW, I barely drink and don't drink and drive ever. This is my hypothetical were I suspected. Lawyer advice seems sound to me. If you refuse to test you lose your license, so what's the advantage? Is it just so you don't have the DUI on your record? What does it show up as if you refuse? Loosing your licenses for a few months vs. loosing it for probably a 1yr + criminal record + fines. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Not if you don't care about driving around suspended, which most people around here don't. I don't necessarily, but getting pinched for it (shit happens, even when you're driving around with a halo over your head) makes getting it back a year later all that much harder. Very rare to get pulled over here. Our city and county cops are probably the laziest in the US. Whereas I live in Ohio, land of the trooper. If somebody told me we have the most cops per capita, I'd believe them instantly and would not ask them to prove it.  I've been pulled over for doing 59 is a 55. I'm a pretty alert driver, but I'm not God-like. Sometimes you slip. My wife was pulled over for not slowing down enough (she couldn't move over), while passing a trooper on the shoulder with his lights on (by himself, mind you). Speed limit was 70, she backed it down to ~55 while going by, he pulled her over. Neither of us were cited (and I'm not complaining), but you can see why I'd be nervous as hell driving in this state on a suspended license. I get pulled over a good 2-3 times a year. No cites in the last 3 years, but still.
|
|
Quoted: What's troubling to me is that if you envoke your 5th amendment protection and refuse to incriminate yourself by failing a breathalizer or stumbling around on a dash cam, you are still subject to criminal sanctions, which here, are almost worse than a 1st offense DUI. Without you incriminating yourself by willfully submitting to and subsequently failing the tests, it would be hard to get a conviction. I guess I am confused by how its legal to get in trouble for pleading the 5th. I have to wonder if these laws have been argued before a higher court to challenge the legality... Interestingly enough, according to Westlaw anyways, I can't find a case where it has been challenged. And there are lots of very rabid AZ DUI attorneys. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not if you don't care about driving around suspended, which most people around here don't. I don't necessarily, but getting pinched for it (shit happens, even when you're driving around with a halo over your head) makes getting it back a year later all that much harder. Very rare to get pulled over here. Our city and county cops are probably the laziest in the US. THis will be harder to get away with due to LPR's becoming more prevalent. It would be better to never get a driver's license in the first place. Can't get it suspended and the penalty for driving without one isn't very severe. |
|
Quoted: Here, a refusal means your license is suspended for a year. Quoted: Quoted: A good lawyer would recommend that you decline, of course you forfeit your license for a period and they may still get a warrant for alcohol testing and compel participation, but at least you aren't giving them what they need to nail the case shut. Even if you are stone cold sober, I can't see how a FST would help you, seems that once a cop has it on his mind you are impaired he's gonna follow through with it to get you. I'm sure some LEOs will say that isn't the case, and it makes perfect sense for a cop to back off when he sees evidence his initial suspicion was wrong, but there isn't any way to know he will, why give them the ammo to use against you? I'd give up my license and continue to drive until I got it back, no shit. I've only been pulled over 1 time in the last 10 years, it's a good bet I could go 6 months without any interaction. FWIW, I barely drink and don't drink and drive ever. This is my hypothetical were I suspected. Lawyer advice seems sound to me. If you refuse to test you lose your license, so what's the advantage? Is it just so you don't have the DUI on your record? What does it show up as if you refuse? Loosing your licenses for a few months vs. loosing it for probably a 1yr + criminal record + fines. A first time DUI conviction on the other hand, will still allow you to drive to work. You get the criminal record and fines, but you're not losing your license over it on the first one. Shit, after your second one in a given period of time, your car gets what we call "party plates". It's basically a red license plate (comes with driving restrictions) that lets EVERYONE on the road know exactly how you earned it.
|
|
Quoted: I'll have to check here in Ohio, but I'm pretty sure they can confiscate your car if you're a bit of a repeat offender. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Not if you don't care about driving around suspended, which most people around here don't. I don't necessarily, but getting pinched for it (shit happens, even when you're driving around with a halo over your head) makes getting it back a year later all that much harder. Very rare to get pulled over here. Our city and county cops are probably the laziest in the US. THis will be harder to get away with due to LPR's becoming more prevalent. It would be better to never get a driver's license in the first place. Can't get it suspended and the penalty for driving without one isn't very severe. |
|
Quoted:
What's troubling to me is that if you envoke your 5th amendment protection and refuse to incriminate yourself by failing a breathalizer or stumbling around on a dash cam, you are still subject to criminal sanctions, which here, are almost worse than a 1st offense DUI. Without you incriminating yourself by willfully submitting to and subsequently failing the tests, it would be hard to get a conviction. I guess I am confused by how its legal to get in trouble for pleading the 5th. I have to wonder if these laws have been argued before a higher court to challenge the legality... That's probably because of implied consent. Remember, DL's are viewed as a privilege, not a right, by the law. The DL suspension is often handled as a civil action completely separate from the criminal DUI charges. |
|
Quoted:
What's troubling to me is that if you envoke your 5th amendment protection and refuse to incriminate yourself by failing a breathalizer or stumbling around on a dash cam, you are still subject to criminal sanctions, which here, are almost worse than a 1st offense DUI. Without you incriminating yourself by willfully submitting to and subsequently failing the tests, it would be hard to get a conviction. I guess I am confused by how its legal to get in trouble for pleading the 5th. I have to wonder if these laws have been argued before a higher court to challenge the legality... Non-testimonial evidence. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Here, a refusal means your license is suspended for a year. Quoted:
Quoted:
A good lawyer would recommend that you decline, of course you forfeit your license for a period and they may still get a warrant for alcohol testing and compel participation, but at least you aren't giving them what they need to nail the case shut. Even if you are stone cold sober, I can't see how a FST would help you, seems that once a cop has it on his mind you are impaired he's gonna follow through with it to get you. I'm sure some LEOs will say that isn't the case, and it makes perfect sense for a cop to back off when he sees evidence his initial suspicion was wrong, but there isn't any way to know he will, why give them the ammo to use against you? I'd give up my license and continue to drive until I got it back, no shit. I've only been pulled over 1 time in the last 10 years, it's a good bet I could go 6 months without any interaction. FWIW, I barely drink and don't drink and drive ever. This is my hypothetical were I suspected. Lawyer advice seems sound to me. If you refuse to test you lose your license, so what's the advantage? Is it just so you don't have the DUI on your record? What does it show up as if you refuse? Loosing your licenses for a few months vs. loosing it for probably a 1yr + criminal record + fines. A first time DUI conviction on the other hand, will still allow you to drive to work. You get the criminal record and fines, but you're not losing your license over it on the first one. Shit, after your second one in a given period of time, your car gets what we call "party plates". It's basically a red license plate (comes with driving restrictions) that lets EVERYONE on the road know exactly how you earned it.
I have the additional benefit of a potential DUI conviction costing me my clearance and therefore my job. A suspended license is a suspended license, I'd just have to explain it. |