Taimoor Rana is seasoned criminal defense attorney specializing in DUI related cases. He shares his expert legal opinion here « DUI Defense Strategies: Errors of DUI Investigation
2
- In this article we have described few probable errors of DUI Investigation such as Blood Test Errors, errors in Probable Cause Arguments,Procedural and Administrative Errors.
Blood Test Errors
Blood tests are generally more accurate. The reasons of errors in blood test are flaws of their own.
Below we have given a list of these errors:
• Test is not administered properly.
• The test is contaminated, such as by swabbing the skin with alcohol.
• The time between the sample drawn and its analysis the alcohol may be formed in the sample by fermentation.
• There could be a mix up in samples that have resulted in a wrong blood sample being analyzed.
Probable Cause Arguments
Lack of Reasonable and Articulable Suspicion for Stop
It has been explained in details under Police Errors, it is required that the officer must be able to establish and convince the Jury that he or she had justifiable and articulable reason to stop you as he or she has seen you performing such actions that violated a law or aroused obvious suspicion.
It is illegal to drive with the window open in cold weather, and to drive late at night when the bars close is also not legal, other things that are considered illegal are weaving within a single lane, or making a turn with a wide radius. It is not a crime to have an unkempt or slovenly personal appearance.
In Delaware vs Prouse it was affirmed by the Supreme Court that “law enforcement’s suspicion must be reasonable and distinct in order to warrant stopping and detaining a driver, such as breaking a law or being a fugitive”.
If an appropriate reason for stopping you cannot be identified by the officer, then an aggressive attorney may get success a case dismissal based on a pretensual and random stop.
Your Detainment Exceeded Reasonable Length
It is determined by the law that the officer cannot detain you longer than a brief, means for a reasonable period. A traffic stop which lasts longer than 20 minutes will become a reason to raise a probable cause defense requiring officer’s articulate justification and he has to explain a “rising level of proof” beyond a hunch or sheer suspicion.
Police Acted On an Anonymous Tip
The officer stopped you just on hearsay rather than he himself has witnessed a violation. In case if the officer lacked of basis or “cause” because the report was unreliable or uncorroborated, or derived from an informant, convicted criminal, etc. then it will Invalidate the stop, invalidate the case.
Procedural and Administrative Errors
There is an error of third class on which a DUI prosecution can fall apart. These errors are originated when the police conducted the test improperly or police might have failed to stick to standard administrative procedures.
Failure To Follow Regulations
The procedures that are laid out in Californias Code of Regulations Title 17 must be followed by anyone who is administering a DUI breath or BAC test. These regulations are frequently breakdown by the police and if they fail to do so then this can invalidate BAC test results and lead to their dismissal as evidence in a case.
For instance, it is necessary to administer a BAC test within 3 hours of the time you’re driving ended. If the police officers failed to do this then it will be difficult to prove that when you were driving your level was above the legal limit.
Improper Officer Behavior
If, while handling your case, justice is obstructed by the arresting officer, he tells a lie in the court of law, or otherwise he had made such attempts to conceal evidence then the prosecution cannot proceed.
More often, if the arresting officer has stopped or arrested without probable cause, the case will likely collapse.In case if the officer retire, move to another city, be fired or himself indicted or die, the case may be dismissed.
Lack Of or Improper Observation Period before Testing
By the regulation the officer is required to observe the DUI suspect for a continuous 15 minute period before BAC testing. The reason behind this is that is the suspect belches, hiccups, regurgitates anything or in that period he or she consumes anything, mouth alcohol may be formed and when blown into the machine, it may result into a false high reading.
If the officer is doing anything else other than watching the suspect, such as he might be filling out reports, setting up the machine, talking to partners, etc., in this case the test results can be challenged and rendered invalid by the court.
It does not count that the arresting officer may transport you to the station in his patrol car, nor does walking around the car to let you out or letting you use the restroom or telephone where you are left alone. It is required that before test the suspect must be continuously observed for not less than fifteen minutes.
Now after reading all the above small percentage of potential defense tactics, a DUI case conviction is rarely a foregone conclusion. Evidence will be presented by the prosecutor, but as we know by what we’ve seen, that much of the evidences that he may present as scientific is, in fact, ambiguous or worse.
There are many factors due to which the case can turn in favor of the defense. The burden of proof rests with the State, in our legal system, and by utilizing the information like what is given here can help a DUI Lawyer develop a successful defense strategy.
You might also like
 |
 |
 |
 |
2 commentsto “DUI Defense Strategies: Errors of DUI Investigation”
Improper Officer Behavior lol ive seen those!
Veto Corleone´s last blog ..Rocket Dog Women’s Dash Ballet Flat
Formation of alcohol in the sample by fermentation between the time the sample is drawn and its analysis. A mix up in samples results in a wrong blood sample being analyzed in short.