|
2.
If I'm stopped by a police officer and he asks me if I've been
drinking, what should I say?
You
are not required to answer potentially incriminating questions.
A polite "I would like to speak with an attorney before I answer
any questions" is a good reply. On the other hand, saying that
you had one or two beers is not incriminating: it is not sufficient
to cause intoxication -- and it may explain the odor of alcohol
on the breath.
3.
Do I have a right to an attorney when I'm stopped by an officer
and asked to take a field sobriety test?
No.
You do not have a right to counsel until you are formally placed
under arrest. By this time most DUI arrestees have already said
-- and done -- to much. In most cases, the officer has already decided
to arrest you before asking you to perform the usual roadside tests.
In effect, by asking you to perform these tests he is simply seeking
additional evidence against you because these tests are designed,
and scored, to make the subject "fail." The most prudent
course of action is to request a lawyer immediately upon being stopped.
Ask the officer to note the time of your request on his or her report.
Produce requested documents (drivers license, proof of insurance
and registration) and say -- and do -- nothing more.
4.
What is the officer looking for during the initial detention at
the scene?
Police
officers are trained to note the following "symptoms of intoxication"
on their report:
- Flushed
face (How does he know your "normal" coloring?)
- Red,
watery, glassy and/or bloodshot eyes (Been up 20 hours?)
- Odor
of alcohol on breath (Doesnt non-alcoholic beer smell
just like Bud?)
- Slurred
speech (How does he know your regular speech
patterns?)
- Fumbling
with wallet trying to get license
- Failure
to comprehend the officer's questions
- Staggering
when exiting vehicle
- Swaying/instability
on feet
- Leaning
on car for support
- Combative,
argumentative, jovial or other "inappropriate" attitude
- Soiled,
rumpled, disorderly clothing
- Stumbling
while walking
- Disorientation
as to time and place
- Inability
to follow directions or to "divide attention."
5.
What should I do if I'm asked to take field sobriety tests?
There
are a wide range of field sobriety tests (FSTs), including the horizontal
gaze nystagmus (eye twitch) test; the walk-and-turn; the one-leg-stand;
heel-to-toe, finger-to-nose, one-leg stand, alphabet recitation,
modified position of attention, fingers-to-thumb, hand pat, etc.
Most officers will use a set battery of three to six such tests.
Unlike
the chemical test, where refusal to submit may have serious administrative
and criminal consequences, you are not legally required to
take any FSTs.
As
noted earlier, the reality is that officers have usually made up
their minds to arrest when they give the FSTs; the tests are simply
additional evidence which the suspect inevitable "fails."
Thus, in most cases a polite refusal may be appropriate.
6.
Why did the officer make me follow a penlight with my eyes to the
left and right?
This
is the "horizontal gaze nystagmus" test. The officer attempts
to estimate the angle at which the eye begins to jerk ("nystagmus"
is medical jargon for eye jerking); if this occurs sooner than 45
degrees, it theoretically indicates an excessive blood-alcohol concentration.
The smoothness of the eye's tracking the penlight (or finger or
pencil) is also a factor, as is the jerking when the eye is as far
to the side as it can go.
This
field sobriety test has proven to be subject to a number of different
problems, not the least of which is the non-medically trained officer's
ability to diagnose a neurological condition, recognize nystagmus
and estimate the angle of onset without the aid of a precise measuring
device. Because of this, and the fact that the test is not accepted
by the medical community, it is not admissible as evidence in many
states. However, the test IS admissible in Arizona to corroborate
chemical test results; or, in the case of a chemical test "refusal,"
as proof of a neurological disorder one cause of which may be alcohol
consumption.
7.
Should I agree to take a chemical test? What happens if I don't?
If
you agree to submit to a BAC / blood alcohol content test, and you
are not driving a commercial vehicle or a repeat offender, your
driver's license may be suspended or restricted for a minimum of
90 days. If you refuse the BAC test, your license may be suspended
for one year. This is true even if you are found not guilty of the
DUI charge.
The
fact of refusal can be introduced into evidence as "consciousness
of guilt." Of course, the defense is free to offer other reasons
for the refusal. Thus, the decision is one of weighing the likelihood
of a high blood-alcohol reading against the administrative consequences
for refusing. By refusing a BAC test, particularly when you are
likely to have a high reading, you deprive the state of potentially
compelling evidence against you.
From
a practical standpoint, it is now police policy in most jurisdictions
in Arizona to obtain a search warrant compelling a blood draw if
you refuse to deliver a voluntary specimen. So, it usually avails you
little to refuse because the state will, one way or the other, obtain
the chemical evidence they want AND you will lose your license for
a year if you refuse. Bottom line:; If you can't reach us, or some
other competent DUI Defense firm, voluntarily submit
to the requested test.
8.
Do I have a choice of chemical tests? Which should I choose?
In
Arizona you must submit to the form of test chosen by the officer--
usually, of breath, blood or urine. You are entitled upon request
to be given an sample of your breath, blood or urine for independent
evaluation. But, NEVER LET THE POLICE KNOW THAT YOU ARE
OBTAINING AN INDEPENDENT FORENSIC SAMPLE without first talking
to our office. As an accused person, you have no burden of proof.
Do not assume one!
Analysis
of a blood sample is potentially the most accurate. As will be discussed
later, breath machines are susceptible to a number of problems rendering
them often unreliable. The least accurate by far, however, is urinalysis.
Thus, if you are offered a choice of tests and you are confident
that you are sober, a blood sample is the wise choice.
Urine,
being least accurate and most easily impeached, is the best option
if you believe your blood-alcohol concentration is above the legal
limit.
9.
The officer never gave me a Miranda warning: Can I get my
case dismissed?
No.
The officer is supposed to give a Miranda warning after he
arrests you. From a practical standpoint, the police will delay
the arrest decision long enough to allow you to make numerous inculpatory
statements. The only consequence of a Miranda violation is
that the prosecution may not use any of your answers to questions
asked by the police after the arrest. Even this limitation has been
eroded because statements made in violation of Miranda can
be used for impeachment purposes should you testify in your own
behalf at trial. Again, the wisest course of action is to say nothing
regardless of whether or not you have been formally placed under
arrest.
Of
more consequence in most cases is the failure to advise you of the
state's "implied consent" law, that is your legal obligation
to take a chemical test and the consequences if you refuse. This
can effect the suspension of your license.
10.
Why am I being charged with TWO crimes?
The
traditional offense is "driving under the influence of alcohol"
(DUI) or, in some states, "driving while intoxicated"
(DWI). In recent years, however, 43 states have also enacted a second,
so-called "per se" offense: driving with an excessive
blood-alcohol concentration (either .08% or .10%). In those states,
BOTH offenses are charged. The defendant can even be convicted of
both, but can be punished for only one.
If
the case involves a refusal to submit to chemical testing, of course,
only the traditional offense can be charged.
11.
The officer took my license and served me with a notice of suspension
after the breath test. How can he do that if I'm presumed innocent?
Agreed,
it is blatantly unfair. But Arizonas "Implied Consent/Admin
Per Se" statute provides for immediate suspension and confiscation
of the license if the breath test result is above the legal limit
(or, in the case of a blood or urine test, if the officer reasonably
believes the result will be above the limit).
It
is essential to understand that a DUI involves two independent and
unrelated proceedings: Criminal proceedings on the DUI charge(s)
and an administrative proceeding before the Department of Motor
Vehicles against your driving privileges. Therefore, it essential
for you--or your attorney--to request a D.M.V. hearing within 15
days of your arrest. The effect of such a request is to "stay,"
or postpone your administrative suspension until the matter can
be heard by an Administrative Law Judge.
12.
Can I represent myself? What can a lawyer do for me?
You
can represent yourself -- although it is not a good idea. "Drunk
driving" is a very complex field with increasingly harsh consequences.
There is a minefield of complicated scientific, procedural, evidentiary,
constitutional, sentencing and administrative license issues.
What
can a lawyer do? Nothing (or worse) if he is not qualified in this
highly specialized field -- no more than a family doctor could help
with brain surgery. A qualified attorney, however, can review the
case for defects, move to suppress evidence, compel discovery of
such things as calibration and maintenance records for the breath
machine, have blood samples independently analyzed, negotiate for
a lesser charge or reduced sentence, obtain expert witnesses for
trial, contest the administrative license suspension, etc.
13.
How can I find a qualified drunk driving lawyer?
The
best way to find a good DUI/DWI lawyer is by reputation. There are
a few attorneys who have national reputations; these, of course,
are expensive. Thus, the best approach is to ask other attorneys
in the jurisdiction: Who is the best in the area? If you do not
know any attorneys, go to the local courthouse and ask people like
bailiffs, clerks and public defenders: Who would THEY go to if arrested
for drunk driving?
An excellent indication of quality and experience is membership
in the National College for DUI Defense. The National College
provides the best advanced-level training to the DUI practitioner.
National College for DUI Defense (NCDD)
Ms.
Rhea Kirk
Executive Director
445 S Decatur
Montgomery AL 36104
Tel: 334-264-1950
Fax: 334-264-1920
rhea@ncdd.com
When
you meet with the attorney, make sure of three things:
1.They
have extensive experience in DUI/DWI litigation.
2.
They have a reputation for going to trial in appropriate cases,
rather than just "pleading out" their clients.
3.The
financial terms of representation are clear and documented.
Some
DUI arrestees consider hiring an ex-cop or an ex-prosecutor to
represent them. Many attorneys start off their legal careers working
for the government to gain experience. Those who stay with a prosecutorial
agency
for more that a year or two often do so because they believe they
cannot succeed in the competitive world of private practice. You
must ask yourself, "Why did this person initially seek to
put people like me behind bars?" Some
attorneys make the ex-cop or ex-prosecutor angle a major selling
point in their marketing efforts. If prior governmental service
appears to be the attorney's number one claim to fame, consider
your choice very carefully. THE LAW OFFICES OF EDWARD A. LOSS
III EMPLOYS NO FORMER COPS AND NO FORMER PROSECUTORS. Cops and
prosecutors are not our friends and they are not your friends.
14.
What will it cost to get a lawyer?
This
varies, of course, by the reputation and experience of the lawyer
and by the geographic location. As with doctors, generally, the
more skilled the attorney and the larger the city, the higher the
fee. A related factor is the amount of time a lawyer devotes to
his cases: the better lawyers take fewer clients, spending more
hours on each.
The
range of fees is huge. A general practitioner in a small community
may charge only $300; a DUI practitioner with a national reputation
may charge up to $10,000 or more, depending on the facts. In addition,
the fee may vary by such other factors as:
1.
Is the offense a misdemeanor or felony?
2.
If prior convictions are alleged, the procedures for attacking
them may add to the cost.
3.
The fee may or may not include trial or appeals.
4.
Administrative license suspension procedures may also be extra.
5.
The lawyer may charge a fixed fee, or he may ask for a retainer
in advance -- to be applied against hourly charges.
6.
Costs such as witness fees, independent blood analysis, service
of subpoenas, etc., may be extra.
Whatever
the fee quoted, you should ask for a written agreement and make
sure you understand all the terms.
15.
What is the punishment for drunk driving?
As
noted above, a conviction for a first offense will involve some
jail time, a fine, a license suspension or restriction, attendance
at a DUI education course for a period of time, and probation for
1-3 years. Additional jail time and more substantial fines will
be required for subsequent convictions. Additional punishment may
involve community service, ignition interlock devices and/or impounding
of the vehicle.
16.
What is a sentence "enhancement"?
Arizona,
like most states, increase the punishment in drunk driving cases
if certain facts exist. The most common of these is an earlier conviction
for the same or a similar offense -- usually within five years of
the current offense. Other commonly encountered enhancements (which
must usually be alleged in the complaint) include:
1.
A child was in the car at the time.
2. There was property damage or injury.
3. The blood-alcohol concentration was over .15%.
The
Arizona courts have held that an automobile is a dangerous instrumentality.
Accordingly, it is not uncommon for the state to charge an aggravated
assault or manslaughter when an DUI involves an accident or injury.
17.
What is "mouth alcohol"?
"Mouth
alcohol" refers to the existence of any alcohol in the mouth
or esophagus. If this is present during a breath test, then the
results will be falsely high.
This
is because the breath machine assumes that the breath is from the
alveolar region of the lungs. For complex physiological reasons,
its internal computer multiplies the amount of alcohol by 2100.
This multiplier is known as the "partition ratio." Thus,
even a tiny amount of alcohol breathed directly into the machine
from the mouth or throat can have a huge impact.
Mouth
alcohol can be caused in many ways. Belching, burping, hiccuping
or vomiting within 20 minutes of taking the test can bring vapor
from alcoholic beverages still in the stomach up into the mouth
and throat. Taking a breath freshener can send a machine's reading
way up (such products as Binaca and Listerine have alcohol in them);
cough syrups and other products also contain alcohol. Dental bridges
and dental caps can trap alcohol. Blood in the mouth from an injury
is yet another source of inaccurate breath test results.
The
Intoxilyzer 5000, the most commonly used evidential breath testing
device in Arizona, has a "slope detector." The purpose
of this slope detector is to detect mouth alcohol and abort the
test sequence. The slope detector is never tested or calibrated
on drinking subjects. It is well known by both defense attorneys
as well as state criminalists that the slope detector can be "fooled"
by a drinking subject.
18.
What defenses are there in a DUI case?
Potential
defenses in a given drunk driving case are almost limitless due
to the complexities of the offense. Roughly speaking, however, the
majority can be broken down into the following areas:
1.
Lack of Driving or Actual Physical Control. Intoxication is
not enough: the prosecution must also prove that the defendant
was driving or in actual physical control of a vehicle while impaired
to the slightest degree for reason of alcohol consumption or with
a BAC of .10 or more within two hours of driving. This may be
difficult if, as in the case of accidents, there are no witnesses
to his or her being the driver of the vehicle.
2.
Lack of Reasonable Suspicion to Stop or Probable Cause to Arrest.
Evidence will be suppressed if the officer did not have legal
cause to (a) stop, (b) detain, and (c) arrest. Sobriety roadblocks
present particularly complex issues.
3.
Miranda. Incriminating statements may be suppressed
if warnings were not given at the appropriate time.
4.
Deficient "Implied Consent" warnings. If the officer
did not advise you of the consequences of refusing to take a chemical
test, or gave the prescribed instructions incorrectly, this may
affect admissibility of the test results -- as well as the license
suspension imposed by the motor vehicle department.
5.
Subjective Nature of the Offense/Erroneous Nature of the Evidence.
Most crimes involve tangible evidence -- a quantity of illegal
drugs, a body, a gun, a knife, etc. An alleged violation of 28-1381(A)(1),
Driving while impaired to the slightest degree, relies almost
exclusively on the subjective and unverifiable impressions of
the arresting officer. The officer's observations and opinions
as to impairment can be questioned. The circumstances and procedures
of the Field Sobriety Tests can also be called into question.
The strong tendency of the police officer to reinforce his arrest
decision with "facts" conveniently corroborative of
that decision can be attacked. Also, DUI arrests translate to
thousands of overtime dollars for the involved officers. This
fact is relevant to a motive on the part of the officer to err
on the side of arrest in close cases and should be brought to
the jurys attention. Furthermore, an alleged violation of
28-1381(A)(2), having an unlawful BAC within two hours of driving,
will also rely an test results that are highly questionable. A
breath test has one compelling -- and erroneous -- assumption:
That all test subjects are "average." The only truly
"average" person is a woman, Chinese and dead
6.
Blood-alcohol concentration. There exists a wide range of
potential problems with blood, breath or urine testing.
A.
Inherent Margin of Error. The Intoxilyzer 5000 has an acknowledged
10% margin of error -- that is a twenty percent range of error.
In other words, on its best day, when the device is calibrated
and deemed to be operating properly, it will have a 10% +/-
margin of error.
B.
Core Body Temperature Variation. The Intoxilyzer 5000 assumes
that every test subject has a core body temperature of 37 degrees
C. and an expired breath temperature of 34 degees C. For each
degree above this assumed average, test results will be 6.8%
higher than the subjects actual blood alcohol level as
measured by the breath reading. This problem tends to be exaggerated
by the circadian effect -- the later after rising that one is
tested, the higher their core body temperature will be. Given
that most DUI arrests occur after midnight, this is a substantial
factor. State witnesses will be forced to admit they dont
have the slightest idea of what a given test subjects
body temperature might have been at the time of the test.
C.
Non-specific and Cumulative Analysis. The Intoxilyzer 5000
is an Infrared Spectrophotometer utilizing a process which measures
the methyl "tail" of any hydro-carbon molecule detectable
at the 3.39 to 3.48 infrared micron wavelength or "stretch".
The device is NOT specific for ethyl alcohol. There are hundreds
of these hydro-carbon compounds on the breath of an alcohol
free subject. Not only does the machine not differentiate between
these compounds, it reads them cumulatively as ethyl alcohol.
D.
Partition Ratio Variation. As mentioned earlier, the Intoxilyzer
5000 assumes a 2100-to-1 ratio in converting alcohol in the
breath to alcohol in the blood. As in the case of core body
temperature, the machine assumes that all test subjects are
"average." In fact, this ratio varies widely from
person to person (and within a person from one moment to another).
By way of illustration, if a person blows a .10 test result,
and that persons actual partition ratio at the time of
testing is 1500-to-1 rather than the presumed 2100-to-1, their
actual blood alcohol level will be closer to .06 -- a level
below the legal limit.
State
"experts" will argue that, given the so called "breath
standard" of "1 gram of alcohol per 210 liters of
breath," the partition ratio is "irrelevant"
because the state need no longer prove blood alcohol content
of "1 gram of alcohol per 100 liters of blood." This
argument can be easily attacked because alcohol on the breath
can not impair a person. Alcohol can only impair a person after
it reaches the central nervous system through the blood. Accordingly,
with respect to the issue of impairment, breath alcohol is only
"relevant" to the extent that it purports to be an
indication of alcohol in the blood. Fortunately, while the legislature
is free to manipulate the law, they are limited in their ability
to manipulate science!
E.
Linearity Problems. By its very nature, infrared spectrophotometry
will have problems with linear validity. In other words, the
machine will not be as accurate at extremely low blood alcohol
levels as it might be as one approaches the legal limit of .10%.
This problem is illustrated by the fact that Arizona Department
of Health Services regulations allow for a measurable volume
(.01 grams) of alcohol to be detected in a subject known
to be alcohol free!
F.
Radio frequency interference. Radio Frequency Interference
or "R.F.I." can result in inaccurate readings. While
the Intoxilyzer 5000 purports to have an "R.F.I. Detector"
that will void a test subject to radio frequency interference,
these detectors are not tested and calibrated at commonly used
frequencies nor are they tested on varying horizontal and vertical
planes.
G.
Testing during the absorptive phase. This is a corollary
of the rising alcohol defense. Alcohol can not effect or impair
a person until it reaches the central nervous system -- the
brain. Alcohol can not begin the process of reaching the brain
until it is absorbed into the bloodstream. The blood, breath
or urine test will be unreliable if done while you are still
actively absorbing alcohol (it takes 45 minutes to three hours
to complete absorption; this can be delayed if food is present
in the stomach). Thus, alcohol consumed within forty-five minutes
before driving might be reflected in a BAC test performed an
hour or so after driving is concluded. But, those "last
drinks" could not have effected your driving because they
were unabsorbed at the time of driving.
H.
Retrograde extrapolation. This refers to the requirement
that the BAC be "related back" in time from the time
of the test to the time of driving and relates to the absorptive
phase/rising alcohol defense referred to in 19(6)(G) above.
Again, a number of complex physiological problems are involved
here including gender, body weight, what alcoholic beverages
were consumed and when.
7.
Regulation of blood-alcohol testing. The prosecution must
prove that the blood, breath or urine test complied with state
requirements as to calibration, maintenance, etc., and was in
proper operating condition at the time of the test. Through the
proper use of discovery, the defense can often unearth "foundational"
deficiencies with respect to the states chemical evidence.
What doesnt get into evidence cant hurt you at trial.
8.
License suspension hearings. A number of issues can be raised
in the context of an administrative hearing before the state's
department of motor vehicles. Most importantly, given the limitations
imposed on a defendants right to engage in pre-trial discovery,
the D.M.V. hearing is an excellent discovery tool and allows the
defendant an opportunity to commit state witnesses to a "story"
under oath.
However,
from a practical standpoint, a defendant ("Petitioner"
in the administrative proceeding) will almost invariably lose at
the D.M.V. hearing.
There
are many reasons for this: The same Administrative Law Judge sits
as both judge and prosecutor -- his or her inclination is
to always uphold the suspension/revocation of your license.
Furthermore,
a D.M.V. hearing is a civil, rather than a criminal, proceeding.
Accordingly, the procedural safeguards inherent in a criminal proceeding
(e.g., burden of proof, ability to "retro" test
results, reliance on the inherent margin of error, etc.) are unavailable
in a D.M.V. hearing. Nonetheless, D.M.V. hearing should be insisted
upon because they are valuable discovery tools.
19.
As a DUI lawyer, what would YOU do if you were stopped for DUI?
1. Immediately request an attorney -- Ask officer to note time
of my request.
2.
Refuse to answer ANY questions (Other than name and address).
3.
Produce requested documents ... be polite even if the officer
isnt.
4.
Refuse ALL field sobriety tests.
5.
Refuse a breath/blood/urine test (Unless I was sure I was under
the legal limit)
I
have some questions about my DUI case. Where can I go for answers?
Our firm offers a FREE,
no-obligation initial consultation.
|