Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Posted: 1/5/2006 11:05:39 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/6/2006 12:22:02 AM EDT by ShadowOne]
I was arguing with my friend last night about what you have the right to do during a police stop for suspicion of DUI. He's got this fantasy that all you have to do is call some pre-paid legal hotline while the LEO has you pulled over, and that will be enough to prevent a sobriety test, and thus arrest and/or conviction. Not a real surprise he dropped out of college and now has more credit card debt than net annual income. I figured that you can still be arrested and have charges brought against you regardless of whether or not you take the sobriety test.

But I looked into it a little, and it seems that in some states you can actually refuse a field sobriety test and/or breathalizer. Good to know for those DUI roadblocks, err, checkpoints. But then you end up rubbing the LEO the wrong way and he/she can really ruin your day.

Not that I would ever DUI, too much at risk. But really, what is the suggested routine when pulled over for suspicion of DUI or for a checkpoint?
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 11:16:44 PM EDT
In some States refusal to take sobriety tests is an offense that can be punishable with a license suspension, or other penalties.

In some States refusal to take sobriety tests can be used by the officer as a factor in formulating probable cause to arrest.

If the officer has PC to arrest, without sobiriety tests, the officer can. If an arrest is made the officer can request an evidentiary test. In all States there are penalties for refusing to do the test when asked. In some States, depending on the laws, and circumstances, the police will FORCE a blood test from an OWI suspect.

Generally, those that refuse sobiriety tests, either totally or certain parts of the test, are so pickled that it doesn't take much to establish PC to arrest.
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 11:19:51 PM EDT
Oh, if you are planning ahead on avoid a DUI, plan on having sober driver, or cab fare if you are going to drink.
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 11:26:27 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/5/2006 11:27:38 PM EDT by LANCEMAN]
I'm sure laws vary by state but a good friend of mine got pulled over in Georgia about 9 years ago and refused the tests. It was an automatic 6 month suspension of his license and some fines but it did not count as a DUI and since he had a FL license and it happened in GA something got mixed up and his FL DL was never suspended and it doesn't even show up on his lifetime Florida driving record from HSMV and never has (I've seen the printout). I think some states actually changed the law that closed the "loophole" in the example here. Of course the best thing to do is just drive when sober.
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 11:30:10 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/5/2006 11:36:58 PM EDT by npd233]
your rights are the same as they were before the stop.

Failure to do some acts may be criminal offenses depending on the state you're in (I believe some states make refusing tests a criminal offense, so failing to submit to them may result in an arrest or additional charges - Illinois does not have such laws, drivers here are free to refuse everything although there are penalties for doing so such as loss of driving privileges)

Some of these may acts are:
-provide driver's license, insurance proof or registration for the vehicle.
-identify yourself
-take field sobriety tests
-take a portable breath test
-take a breathalyzer

these two have been upheld by SCOTUS as acceptable actions by officers during a traffic stop - failure to comply is an arrestable offense:
-fail to remain in your vehicle if the officer tells you to stay in it.
-fail to exit your vehicle if the officer tells you to exit it.

edit - I'll add this to what someone else said before me...
If you dont' drive drunk, you dont' have anything to worry about. Talk to the officer just like he's any other person. Wear your seat belt, have your insurance card in your car, and know where it is, so the stop can be concluded quickly and efficiently.

None of us want drunk drivers on the road, the only people who can take them off the roads once they're out there are the police officers. That and of course the other option where they crash. Inevitably, the other (sober) driver is the one who always gets injured.
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 11:39:50 PM EDT
In MO if you refuse any breath test or soberiety test you are revoked of your DL on the spot for at least one year maybe more???? and if you get revoked you obviously cant drive home with out being arrested for driving on a suspended license.
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 11:41:09 PM EDT
So what about checkpoints? Why should a sober citizen subject himself to a field sobriety test? Breathalyzers can malfunction, etc. I'm just playing devil's advocate here, from the perspective of citizens who wish to protect themselves from intrusion.
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 11:45:33 PM EDT
[moron]You have no rights, because driving is a priveledge. Do as the officer tells you.[/moron]
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 11:45:43 PM EDT
I thought if you refused to take a field breathalizer or sobriety test, the option was they take you into custody and take you to the station (or hospital) for blood test.

Doesn't seem worth the trouble if you are sober.

No Expert
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 11:54:30 PM EDT
I still can't understand the requirement to provide self-incriminating evidence sans a warrant. My annual alcohol intake is something along the lines of 2-3 bottles of beer per year so my DUI would probably come right after my alien abduction. Is the license revocation just a "pile-on" charge? Can officers give random tests during routine stops (i.e. speeding, running stop signs, etc) or are they limited to suspected DUI stops, and roadblocks, only?
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 12:27:02 AM EDT
Generally,

The police need a Reasonable Articulable Suspicion that a person is committing a crime or infraction to stop them.

The police need that same Reasonable Articulable Suspicion to go from a "regular traffic stop" to requesting sobriety tests.

The police need PC to arrest a person. Police can only request "evidentiary" tests for BAC after an arrest has been made.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 12:36:10 AM EDT
I think you should consult James Brown on this issue.


-HS
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 12:47:15 AM EDT

Originally Posted By ShadowOne:
So what about checkpoints? Why should a sober citizen subject himself to a field sobriety test? Breathalyzers can malfunction, etc. I'm just playing devil's advocate here, from the perspective of citizens who wish to protect themselves from intrusion.



Playing devil's advocate back to you, FST's are only initiated once there is evidence of drinking (whether the driver is sober or not) The tests are used to determine the level of impairment. You might exhibit all the classic signs of impairment but may be sober, taking the tests can prove your case and get you released from the stop rather than refusing everything and causing the officer to rely only on his observations of your physical condition and your behavior. I'd rather err on the side of caution and make the arrest since all I need for that is probable cause. Whether or not the case can be proved in court might be another story, but I'll let the prosecutor deal with that. At least the impaired driver's off the road, which was my concern in the first place.

As for malfunctioning, your bathroom scale could also read ZERO pounds, too. I can only speak for
myself, but I don't use equipment that is malfunctioning. It is all tested every shift, and calibrated when required per manufacturer's specs.

Intrusion into what? You're on the public roads, not in your living room.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 12:49:52 AM EDT
I just assume that when I step out of my front door that I have no rights. It just makes things easier.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 12:56:21 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Dracster:
My annual alcohol intake is something along the lines of 2-3 bottles of beer per year so my DUI would probably come right after my alien abduction.




So then what happens when the UFO gets stopped at a check point? Is it the Alien abductor or you should be subject to a sobriety test? Or should the Alien refuse based on he is an illegal alien and not a citizen, and open fire with his pre-ban death ray?

I'm waiting on the eventual gun fight at the check point cliche.....
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 1:06:47 AM EDT
Some people might do well to try to understand that if you drive drunk, the rest of us want you off the road. Most people understand this fact and have no problem with it. The oppositionally defiant mindset that some people live with must be difficult to deal with.

Consider it an invasion of your rights or whatever you want to call it, the rest of us simply don't care what you think.

If however you're sober, don't worry and don't be paranoid. Thank the officers for being there if you happen to get stopped at a roadblock and wish them a safe night.

If you've been drinking a few, feel borderline or you don't know if you're drunk... Don't get behind the wheel. It's not that difficult a choice for you to make.

Link Posted: 1/6/2006 2:21:24 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/6/2006 2:23:36 AM EDT by s1rGr1nG0]
I was a court clerk on the probable cause docket in Harris County, Texas (Houston) for about 5 years. I heard literally thousands of PC's for DUI/DWI. When you get pulled over an officer is not going to just randomly give you a field sobriety test.
Now, if you get pulled over for weaving in and out of your lane you probably will. If you get pulled over for any traffic offense and the officer notes glassy/bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, and/or an odor of an alcoholic beverage on your breath you can bet your ass you will be given a field sobriety test. At this point you can refuse to take the test but rest assured you will be taken to jail. Once at jail you will be offered a breath test to which of course you can refuse. Who do you think the DA will believe when it comes time to file charges? You may not get a DUI/DWI but more than likely at minimum your license will be suspended.
Also, a field sobriety test is not just for people who have been drinking. They will also test if they believe you are on some prescription meds or similar stuff that will impair your ability to drive. I've seen many DWI's for people who failed the field sobriety tests and then blew a 0.0 on the breath test.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 3:48:48 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/6/2006 3:49:46 AM EDT by thecleaner]
As an LEO that does alcohol enforcement, you have the right to refuse everything from field tests to breath tests. But it doesn't mean it'll be pleasant in the least. If you do refuse and the officer can articulate why he/she thinks you MAY be intoxicated, you're basically fucked.

Some things you should realize about refusing.

1) Ahhhh yes, the famous; "CALL A LAWYER BEFORE DOING ANY TESTS!" Fine, I'll let you quickly call your slug. A good one will tell you to go with the flow. A bad one will tell you to refuse. We as cops don't get a free toaster for taking your drunk ass to jail. Lawyers that complicate your case telling you to refuse however get MORE OF YOUR MONEY.

2) I've had folks refuse EVERYTHING. Even the PBT (an additional CI ticket). They've still gone to jail. I've NEVER lost on a refusal.

3) You WILL lose your license + 6pnts (in MI it's 1 year). Not worth it. Especially if its your 1st offense. Good luck getting to work.

4) Refusing the REAL breath test looks real bad in the eyes of the court. A cooperative drunk usually gets a good deal. * NOTE: I tell folks that if they're cool, I'll put it in my report, AND I DO. It does make a difference believe it or not.

5) Refusing means drawing a warrant for a blood. IT TAKES ME 10 MINUTES to do that.

6) The results of a blood draw will be higher.

7) Jail time is longer. IE a blood draw is a mandatory 12 hour stay in county. Now say if you blew a .15, you'll be going home in 5 hours or less depending if your alcohol level was goin up or down.

Hope that helps.

Cleaner

Link Posted: 1/6/2006 3:50:28 AM EDT
you have the right to chew bubblegum...
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 5:00:46 AM EDT

Originally Posted By ShadowOne:
Breathalyzers can malfunction, etc.


The "Breathalyzer" is an antique thats been retired from service for a few years now. The current Datamasters and similar models perform diagnostic self-tests that preclude any sort of "error" that you mentioned.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 5:17:45 AM EDT
Assuming I have normal windows (non-tinted), How much am I required to lower the side window? Is a quarter to half inch (enough to pass DL/registration) legal?

I know that the occifer wants the window completely down. Logically, if you put ALL windows down the outside air will dilute the in-car air, but wouldn't that be a flag too?
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 5:25:49 AM EDT
In my state you can refusde to amswer questions about your drinking. you can refuse to perform field sobriety tests. you can refuse to take a preliminary alcohol screening test.

You must present your license, registration, and insurance upon demand. You must follow reasonable instructions done for the officers safety like keeping your hands visable and getting out of the car if told to.

If arrested, you must complete a breath or blood test. If you refuse, the cops can and usually will force blood.


Even without FST's you still have the observed driving leading to the stop, the objective symptoms of intoxication, the officers training and experiance all contributing to PC to arrest.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 5:34:15 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/6/2006 5:37:38 AM EDT by jcncc]
If you have been drinking refuse the test. Go to jail, Never give evidence against yourself. Better to lose your driving privilage than have a DUI on your record. They can fake you out, tell you anything, but can not force you to provide evidence against yourself.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 5:40:13 AM EDT

Originally Posted By thecleaner:
As an LEO that does alcohol enforcement, you have the right to refuse everything from field tests to breath tests. But it doesn't mean it'll be pleasant in the least. If you do refuse and the officer can articulate why he/she thinks you MAY be intoxicated, you're basically fucked.

Some things you should realize about refusing.

1) Ahhhh yes, the famous; "CALL A LAWYER BEFORE DOING ANY TESTS!" Fine, I'll let you quickly call your slug. A good one will tell you to go with the flow. A bad one will tell you to refuse. We as cops don't get a free toaster for taking your drunk ass to jail. Lawyers that complicate your case telling you to refuse however get MORE OF YOUR MONEY.

2) I've had folks refuse EVERYTHING. Even the PBT (an additional CI ticket). They've still gone to jail. I've NEVER lost on a refusal.

3) You WILL lose your license + 6pnts (in MI it's 1 year). Not worth it. Especially if its your 1st offense. Good luck getting to work.

4) Refusing the REAL breath test looks real bad in the eyes of the court. A cooperative drunk usually gets a good deal. * NOTE: I tell folks that if they're cool, I'll put it in my report, AND I DO. It does make a difference believe it or not.

5) Refusing means drawing a warrant for a blood. IT TAKES ME 10 MINUTES to do that.

6) The results of a blood draw will be higher.

7) Jail time is longer. IE a blood draw is a mandatory 12 hour stay in county. Now say if you blew a .15, you'll be going home in 5 hours or less depending if your alcohol level was goin up or down.

Hope that helps.

Cleaner




So Cleaner,

If you pulled me over in your town and I blew a .25, you'd let me off, right?
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 5:47:02 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/6/2006 5:49:41 AM EDT by wildearp]
In most states, implied consent means blood, breath, or urine test. Field sobriety tests FST are coordination tests. HGN too. As far as I know, non of the FSTs are part of the implied consent. They are priceless in gathering evidence to convict you.

I think if you jump directly to the required test and refuse all others, you will do better in court, even if drunk, with a good lawyer. However, you lose either way. $15K is a good estimate on what your defense will cost.

Best bet is to designate a driver.

You can also refuse all tests. Then, based on reasonable suspicion/probable cause, a telephonic search warrant can be obtained and then blood may be taken by force. I have seen this first hand. It is a truly amazing look on a drunks face when 8 knuckle dragging cops are ready for an ass beating and are all standing around when the search warrant is read. Priceless.

Party smart!!!
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 6:01:21 AM EDT

Originally Posted By jcncc:
If you have been drinking refuse the test. Go to jail, Never give evidence against yourself. Better to lose your driving privilage than have a DUI on your record. They can fake you out, tell you anything, but can not force you to provide evidence against yourself.



You are about 90% right.

I can force blood, without a warrant, to prevent the destruction of evidence. You body is detroying the physical evidence of your impairment by processing the alcohol. So you will be giving a blood smple. it might involve TASERs, restraints, and a dog pile of angry jail gaurds, but you will put your arm out for that needle.

I'm not DUI guru, I only do 20-30 a year. but nobody has ever not given a blood/breath. I've even have the nurse take it out of a foot, shoulder or neck vein if necessary.

Link Posted: 1/6/2006 6:04:10 AM EDT
You have no rights. The state has taken them from you.

Link Posted: 1/6/2006 6:04:34 AM EDT

Originally Posted By wildearp:
$15K is a good estimate on what your defense will cost.




$10,000 for a lawyer no better than the public defender. $25K for one of the big name DUI attornies that advertise on the Bar bathroom bulliten board. Plus $500.00 for a 1-hour DMV hearing (i know lots of cops who got their Law degree just to do DMV hearings at $500.00 a pop.)
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 6:06:22 AM EDT

Originally Posted By AR15fan:

Originally Posted By jcncc:
If you have been drinking refuse the test. Go to jail, Never give evidence against yourself. Better to lose your driving privilage than have a DUI on your record. They can fake you out, tell you anything, but can not force you to provide evidence against yourself.



You are about 90% right.

I can force blood, without a warrant, to prevent the destruction of evidence. You body is detroying the physical evidence of your impairment by processing the alcohol. So you will be giving a blood smple. it might involve TASERs, restraints, and a dog pile of angry jail gaurds, but you will put your arm out for that needle.

I'm not DUI guru, I only do 20-30 a year. but nobody has ever not given a blood/breath. I've even have the nurse take it out of a foot, shoulder or neck vein if necessary.




And what about the 5th amendment, saying you have the right to not incriminate yourself?
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 6:12:04 AM EDT

Originally Posted By tc556guy:

Originally Posted By ShadowOne:
Breathalyzers can malfunction, etc.


The "Breathalyzer" is an antique thats been retired from service for a few years now. The current Datamasters and similar models perform diagnostic self-tests that preclude any sort of "error" that you mentioned.



Unfortunately there are still departments that use them.

Link Posted: 1/6/2006 6:18:21 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/6/2006 6:20:02 AM EDT by rkbar15]

Originally Posted By jcncc:
If you have been drinking refuse the test. Go to jail, Never give evidence against yourself. Better to lose your driving privilage than have a DUI on your record. They can fake you out, tell you anything, but can not force you to provide evidence against yourself.



In many states you can still be convicted of DWI based only on the observations of the Officer. In addition in some states you will subject to a civil fine for refusing a chemical test of of your blood or urine. In some states you can be compelled to take a blood test by a warrant issued by a judge over the phone.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 6:19:35 AM EDT

Originally Posted By falaholic1:

Originally Posted By AR15fan:

Originally Posted By jcncc:
If you have been drinking refuse the test. Go to jail, Never give evidence against yourself. Better to lose your driving privilage than have a DUI on your record. They can fake you out, tell you anything, but can not force you to provide evidence against yourself.



You are about 90% right.

I can force blood, without a warrant, to prevent the destruction of evidence. You body is detroying the physical evidence of your impairment by processing the alcohol. So you will be giving a blood smple. it might involve TASERs, restraints, and a dog pile of angry jail gaurds, but you will put your arm out for that needle.

I'm not DUI guru, I only do 20-30 a year. but nobody has ever not given a blood/breath. I've even have the nurse take it out of a foot, shoulder or neck vein if necessary.




And what about the 5th amendment, saying you have the right to not incriminate yourself?



The 5th does not include the right to destroy evidence as the police watch.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 6:20:55 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/6/2006 6:26:44 AM EDT by Dolomite]
The Implied Consent Law in Wisconsin declares that anyone operating* any vehicle anywhere in Wisconsin** is deemed to have given to any State LEO free consent to one or more tests of your breath, blood or urine, for the purpose of ascertaining the quantity of any intoxicant they can find. A citizen has the right to refuse these chemical tests - but the penalty is roughly double that of a first DUI and the refusal will still count against you as a DUI offense in the future (Thank you MADD).

What you don't have to do here is submit to the standard field sobriety tests. This includes the "horizontal gaze nystagmus" test where a LEO asks you to follow a pen light in front of your face to attempt to estimate the angle at which your eyeballs begins to jerk. Another tactic that they have at their disposal is even simpler; getting you to talk, and talk a lot. A slur, stammer, stutter, or a substitution (as in, "What preems to be the soblem ossifer?") can and will be used against you.

Sure, not opening your mouth and refusing non-chemical sobriety tests may raise an officer’s suspicion (he or she may even act mean to you!) – but you know what – if you’ve been drinking and decide to drive you better resign yourself to the fact that the last round of beers you bought that night carried with it a $15,000 price tag, because that’s what it’s going to cost you in the long run in terms of fees, fines, attorneys, and insurance rate hikes.

If you get pulled over you’re fucked - it’s that simple, and you become a piece of evidence to be exploited by the police so that they can build a rock solid case against you (but you've already read that on page 1 of this thread). Unless you're a child or think like one, the cop is not your friend and is not trying to help you when he or she asks you to recite the alphabet or walk a straight line. If you want to add stupidity to stupidity and volunteer for tests you absolutely do not have to perform, then you deserve everything you get.



*keys in the ignition
**including your private property
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 6:23:29 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/6/2006 6:31:36 AM EDT by wildearp]

Originally Posted By AR15fan:

Originally Posted By jcncc:
If you have been drinking refuse the test. Go to jail, Never give evidence against yourself. Better to lose your driving privilage than have a DUI on your record. They can fake you out, tell you anything, but can not force you to provide evidence against yourself.



You are about 90% right.

I can force blood, without a warrant, to prevent the destruction of evidence. You body is detroying the physical evidence of your impairment by processing the alcohol. So you will be giving a blood smple. it might involve TASERs, restraints, and a dog pile of angry jail gaurds, but you will put your arm out for that needle.

I'm not DUI guru, I only do 20-30 a year. but nobody has ever not given a blood/breath. I've even have the nurse take it out of a foot, shoulder or neck vein if necessary.




The risk here is that if you are not drunk, you still lose your license for a year. You would be driving much sooner with a DUI charge, even if guilty. Stupid is as stupid does.


*keys in the ignition
**including your private property


(physical control) This includes a riding lawn mower, an ATV, a golf cart, an electric wheel chair, etc. Think before you drink.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 6:24:41 AM EDT

Originally Posted By falaholic1:

Originally Posted By AR15fan:

Originally Posted By jcncc:
If you have been drinking refuse the test. Go to jail, Never give evidence against yourself. Better to lose your driving privilage than have a DUI on your record. They can fake you out, tell you anything, but can not force you to provide evidence against yourself.



You are about 90% right.

I can force blood, without a warrant, to prevent the destruction of evidence. You body is detroying the physical evidence of your impairment by processing the alcohol. So you will be giving a blood smple. it might involve TASERs, restraints, and a dog pile of angry jail gaurds, but you will put your arm out for that needle.

I'm not DUI guru, I only do 20-30 a year. but nobody has ever not given a blood/breath. I've even have the nurse take it out of a foot, shoulder or neck vein if necessary.




And what about the 5th amendment, saying you have the right to not incriminate yourself?




LoL, once again, you have no rights.

npd223
"I'd rather err on the side of caution and make the arrest since all I need for that is probable cause. Whether or not the case can be proved in court might be another story,"

Your best bet is to avoid JBT as he can arrest you anyways for shits and giggles.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 6:29:42 AM EDT
[typical response to DWI threads] waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, I dont have any rights [/typical response to DWI threads]
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 6:32:28 AM EDT

Originally Posted By NCPatrolAR:
[typical response to DWI threads] waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, I dont have any rights [/typical response to DWI threads]



You, most certainly, do have a right to designate a driver.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 6:32:29 AM EDT

Originally Posted By npd233:

Originally Posted By ShadowOne:
So what about checkpoints? Why should a sober citizen subject himself to a field sobriety test? Breathalyzers can malfunction, etc. I'm just playing devil's advocate here, from the perspective of citizens who wish to protect themselves from intrusion.



Playing devil's advocate back to you, FST's are only initiated once there is evidence of drinking (whether the driver is sober or not) The tests are used to determine the level of impairment. You might exhibit all the classic signs of impairment but may be sober, taking the tests can prove your case and get you released from the stop rather than refusing everything and causing the officer to rely only on his observations of your physical condition and your behavior. I'd rather err on the side of caution and make the arrest since all I need for that is probable cause. Whether or not the case can be proved in court might be another story, but I'll let the prosecutor deal with that. At least the impaired driver's off the road, which was my concern in the first place.

As for malfunctioning, your bathroom scale could also read ZERO pounds, too. I can only speak for
myself, but I don't use equipment that is malfunctioning. It is all tested every shift, and calibrated when required per manufacturer's specs.

Intrusion into what? You're on the public roads, not in your living room.





My college roomate is a PO now. He told me he will give a field sobriety test to anyone that is 'mouthy' to him.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 6:33:31 AM EDT

Originally Posted By xxTAPxx:

Originally Posted By npd233:

Originally Posted By ShadowOne:
So what about checkpoints? Why should a sober citizen subject himself to a field sobriety test? Breathalyzers can malfunction, etc. I'm just playing devil's advocate here, from the perspective of citizens who wish to protect themselves from intrusion.



Playing devil's advocate back to you, FST's are only initiated once there is evidence of drinking (whether the driver is sober or not) The tests are used to determine the level of impairment. You might exhibit all the classic signs of impairment but may be sober, taking the tests can prove your case and get you released from the stop rather than refusing everything and causing the officer to rely only on his observations of your physical condition and your behavior. I'd rather err on the side of caution and make the arrest since all I need for that is probable cause. Whether or not the case can be proved in court might be another story, but I'll let the prosecutor deal with that. At least the impaired driver's off the road, which was my concern in the first place.

As for malfunctioning, your bathroom scale could also read ZERO pounds, too. I can only speak for
myself, but I don't use equipment that is malfunctioning. It is all tested every shift, and calibrated when required per manufacturer's specs.

Intrusion into what? You're on the public roads, not in your living room.





My college roomate is a PO now. He told me he will give a field sobriety test to anyone that is 'mouthy' to him.



With no odor if intoxicant, or other indicators of controlled substance abuse, this action would probably be a magnet for a complaint.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 6:33:54 AM EDT

Originally Posted By wildearp:
The risk here is that if you are not drunk, you still lose your license for a year. You would be driving much sooner with a DUI charge, even if guilty. Stupid is as stupid does.



That depends on whether you've had prior DWI convictions and what state you happen to be in. In some cases a refusal could result in a reduced penalty.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 9:15:17 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/6/2006 9:26:21 AM EDT by thecleaner]

Originally Posted By chooper:

Originally Posted By thecleaner:
As an LEO that does alcohol enforcement, you have the right to refuse everything from field tests to breath tests. But it doesn't mean it'll be pleasant in the least. If you do refuse and the officer can articulate why he/she thinks you MAY be intoxicated, you're basically fucked.

Some things you should realize about refusing.

1) Ahhhh yes, the famous; "CALL A LAWYER BEFORE DOING ANY TESTS!" Fine, I'll let you quickly call your slug. A good one will tell you to go with the flow. A bad one will tell you to refuse. We as cops don't get a free toaster for taking your drunk ass to jail. Lawyers that complicate your case telling you to refuse however get MORE OF YOUR MONEY.

2) I've had folks refuse EVERYTHING. Even the PBT (an additional CI ticket). They've still gone to jail. I've NEVER lost on a refusal.

3) You WILL lose your license + 6pnts (in MI it's 1 year). Not worth it. Especially if its your 1st offense. Good luck getting to work.

4) Refusing the REAL breath test looks real bad in the eyes of the court. A cooperative drunk usually gets a good deal. * NOTE: I tell folks that if they're cool, I'll put it in my report, AND I DO. It does make a difference believe it or not.

5) Refusing means drawing a warrant for a blood. IT TAKES ME 10 MINUTES to do that.

6) The results of a blood draw will be higher.

7) Jail time is longer. IE a blood draw is a mandatory 12 hour stay in county. Now say if you blew a .15, you'll be going home in 5 hours or less depending if your alcohol level was goin up or down.

Hope that helps.

Cleaner




So Cleaner,

If you pulled me over in your town and I blew a .25, you'd let me off, right?



Depends, are you blowing into the 'plastic' straw?......Bitch
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 9:30:05 AM EDT
Cops are always right....especially when they're wrong.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 9:36:42 AM EDT
I love these threads.

I didn't give a rats ass if you do the FST's or not. I'm still hooking you up. Once we get to the jail. go ahead and refuse the breath test. I have yet to see anyone walk with "REFUSED" written across the breath test. A judge looks at it an immeidately knows you were drunk.

And the refusual brings a longer and immediate suspension of your DL as compared to a first time DUI.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 9:43:57 AM EDT
You have the right to give the state all of the proof it needs to convict you.

You have the right to go to jail.

You have the right to pay outrageous fines.

You have the right to go to forced AA meetings.

You have the right to get your name and picture published in the paper.

All because you couldn't say no to the couple of drinks you had with dinner!

You drunkard!!


Link Posted: 1/6/2006 9:49:01 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
I love these threads.

I didn't give a rats ass if you do the FST's or not. I'm still hooking you up. Once we get to the jail. go ahead and refuse the breath test. I have yet to see anyone walk with "REFUSED" written across the breath test. A judge looks at it an immeidately knows you were drunk.

And the refusual brings a longer and immediate suspension of your DL as compared to a first time DUI.



I agree. refusal to do FST's is an automatic arrest in my book. Refuse the breath test at HQ then I charge them with DUI observation and refusal. It doubles the penalties as there is no "double jeopardy", they are seperate offenses.

If your not sure if youve had too much don't drive.

If you want to drink and drive I'm happy to provide the "chaser"
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 10:03:02 AM EDT
You have the same rights in DWI stops as you have in any other stop. Your rights are not offense specific.

That said, I PREFER refusals. It turns a 2 hour DWI into a 20 minute DWI. (Not counting transit time to the jail) I have somewhere around 1800 career total DWI arrests. I have NEVER lost in court on a refusal.

Not driving drunk is your best bet. Your SECOND best bet is to cooperate and admit you screwed up. It does result in lighter punishment/fines.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 10:07:21 AM EDT

Originally Posted By wildearp:

Originally Posted By NCPatrolAR:
[typical response to DWI threads] waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, I dont have any rights [/typical response to DWI threads]



You, most certainly, do have a right to designate a driver.



Yeah, let them hassle the designated driver!
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 10:20:12 AM EDT
In NC, it works similar to the Wis. law Dolomite posted except for the following:
Our law states "public vehicular area" it can be private property open to public use, but only then.

Here we also have a problem with anyone who blows .16 or more. They get a nice little machine to blow into installed in their car before they can drive for a year. That means even if they get a "paper" license or when they get their real license back, they have to pay a shitload and get that neat little aforementioned machine.

Here, I tell people the following:

1. If you get pulled, your best bet (if you are tanked and may be borderline from drinking a shitload while back) is to refuse breathalyzer, and refuse FST. Make them take you to the station to do the intoxilyzer. maybe you'll luck out and metabolize below the limit. Here some judges say you have to have impairment and .08 or better. Most judges have gone to the Virginia standard and read the statute to read impairment or no - at .08 you get a pair of shiny bracelets and a free ride in a two tone car.

2. If you are pulled, your best bet (if you are tanked and may be borderline from drinking a shitload only within say the last hour) is to do whatever the officer wants 'cause your screwed.

And to those officers who talk a good game about what PC you have, here in NC I've seen officers who thought they had a lock, but good attorneys created a hole big enough to drive a truck through. I don't focus on PC based on what happens after you pull 'em, I look at why you pulled 'em to begin with. Seen too many officers run plates and pull with "that feeling" or for 5 over when they would let anyone else go on down the road.
Funny to see an officer have to explain that he has not pulled other people when they were 5 or 7 over and weaving without crossing any lines.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 10:25:00 AM EDT
Go for the jury trial. I've been on two juries where we've acquitted the alledged "drunk".
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 10:30:34 AM EDT
i had a friend who was a lawyer, he told me that in texas you should ALWAYS refuse to blow.

.08 limit here is arbitrarily low and chances are if you have been drinking at all you will get a DUI. if you refuse to blow its an automatic 90 day suspension of your license, but you will most likely get off the DUI charge, assuming of course that you were not intoxicated in the realistic sense of the word.

if you are going to get your licensed suspended anyway for DUI he said just dont blow and deal with the suspension, not the criminal charge and $5000 a DUI would cost.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 10:44:40 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/6/2006 10:50:32 AM EDT by Johninaustin]

Originally Posted By daemon734:
i had a friend who was a lawyer, he told me that in texas you should ALWAYS refuse to blow.

.08 limit here is arbitrarily low and chances are if you have been drinking at all you will get a DUI. if you refuse to blow its an automatic 90 day suspension of your license, but you will most likely get off the DUI charge, assuming of course that you were not intoxicated in the realistic sense of the word.

if you are going to get your licensed suspended anyway for DUI he said just dont blow and deal with the suspension, not the criminal charge and $5000 a DUI would cost.



Read my post above. Funny how in all these years of doing DWI's I've never had a lawyer refuse.

I have had those "my dad's a lawyer" types get their ass chewed by dad when THEY refused.


BTW: I'm not really into all that spelling Nazi stuff, but "Texas" should ALWAYS be capitalized. Other states, it's just fine to stay in lower case.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Top Top