Minneapolis DWI and DUI Lawyer & Attorney : Brown Law Firm : Minnesota Drunk Driving, Sobriety Tests : Minneapolis, St. Paul, Twin Cities, Minnesota

Thanks to Matthew Ruff, a respected Los Angeles DUI Lawyer who handles cases throughout California, for a recent post concerning the main reasons that the police pull people over for a DUI.

In his article, Ruff notes that the National Highway Safety Transportation Safety Administration has identified a number of behaviors that suggest a probability of driver intoxication (the basis for the police to stop a driver):

• Turning the car with a wide radius;
• Straddling the center or a lane line or marker;
• Appearing to be drunk or visibly intoxicated;
• Almost striking a fixed roadside object or vehicle;
• Weaving within or outside a lane of travel;
• Driving the vehicle somewhere other than the designated roadway;
• Swerving in a sudden fashion;
• Driving at a slow speed;
• Stopping the car in the lane without cause;
• Following another vehicle too closely, improper or unsafe distance;
• Drifting in and out of the lane;
• Tires traveling on center or lane marker;
• Braking suddenly or erratically;
• Driving into opposing or crossing traffic;
• Signaling a turn inconsistent with driving actions;
• Stopping inappropriately other than in lane;
• Slow response to green lights or other traffic signals;
• Turning abruptly or illegally, in violation of traffic laws;
• Accelerating or decelerating rapidly; or 
• Headlights off at night.

He further points out that once a driver is pulled over, the following behaviors indicate some level of intoxication on the part of the driver (and provide probable cause for an officer to conduct field sobriety tests):

• Difficulty with vehicle controls;
• Difficulty exiting vehicle;
• Fumbling with a drivers license or registration;
• Repeating questions or comments to the officer;
• Swaying, unsteadiness or balance problems while speaking to the police officer;
• Leaning on the vehicle;
• Slurred, thick or drunken speech;
• Slowness in responding to questions, or asking officer to repeat questions;
• Providing incorrect information or changing answers; or
• Odor of an alcoholic beverage.

Keep in mind that one of the key defenses in a DWI case is the argument that the arresting officer did not have an "articulable basis" for the stop that resulted in a drunk driving charge or probable cause to conduct field sobriety tests. If the court agrees, a DWI stemming from an illegal stop or a legally insufficient demand to submit to testing will be dismissed.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In order for an officer to require a driver to submit to field sobriety tests and a preliminary breath test, they must have witnessed something that warranted a reasonable, articulable suspicion that the driver was impaired by alcohol. Probable cause is not a prerequisite to obtaining a PBT or compelling a driver to submit to field sobriety testing.

There are four key ways in which an officer can articulate suspicion of drunk driving:

1. Driving Conduct. The behavior of driver often provides the basis for a stop. If an officer witnesses a driver who appears unable to control a vehicle, drives unusually fast or slow, weaves, accelerates excessively, makes wide turns or attempts to evade law enforcement, sufficient suspicion exists to pull a driver over.
2. Characteristics of the Driver. Once a driver is pulled over, the officer will look for visual clues of intoxication, including watery eyes, bloodshot eyes, flushed face, dilated pupils, slow reaction to light, difficulty in moving within the vehicle and the presence of bottles or other drug paraphernalia in the vehicle.
3. Odor. In addition to witnessing a driver's physical characteristics, the officer will report whether an odor of alcohol was found on the person's breath or in the car. Any unusual odor, including breath sprays or other materials use to mask the smell of alcohol, may also serve as a foundation for further testing.
4. Audible Evidence. Finally, the officer will always speak with the driver in a way geared toward determining whether the person has consumed alcohol. Routine questions may be asked, with an ear toward slurred speech, delayed response or angry reactions.

Once the officer has pieced together a number of these elements, it is safe to say that the stop was legal, giving the officer the authority to conduct further testing to determine whether there is probable cause to arrest the driver for DWI.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Minnesota’s implied consent law requires a person who drives or operates a motor vehicle to consent to a breath, blood or urine test for purposes of detecting the presence of alcohol or other controlled substances in a person’s body. These tests are administered by a law enforcement officer when they have probable cause to believe that a person has violated a law by driving under the influence of alcohol.

In order to build probable cause, law enforcement will typically observe the impaired driver and form a reasonable suspicion of a driving violation. Based upon their reasonable suspicion, they stop and question the driver. Following the stop, field sobriety tests and a preliminary breath test are given. If the officer’s tests lead the officer to conclude that a DWI has occurred, they may arrest the individual and demand a more thorough evidentiary test of the person’s blood alcohol content through a blood, breath or urine test.

Before administering these tests, law enforcement must read the implied consent advisory statement to the driver, explaining that the test is mandatory and that refusal to test is a crime. Moreover, they must indicate to the individual that they have the right to consult with a lawyer before taking the test. If no implied consent advisory is offered, the driver may still be charged with a crime and prosecuted, but the administrative sanctions through the Minnesota Department of Public Safety (usually a licensed suspension) cannot follow.

It is up to law enforcement to determine which of the three tests (breath, blood or urine) will be taken. If an individual refuses one type of test, they must be offered another type of test. Urine and blood tests are analyzed by the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension. The results of these tests are usually available within one or two weeks. The results of a breath test are known almost immediately.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in partnership with the Minnesota Department of Public Safety has published a summary of Minnesota DWI & DUI statutes entitled "EZ DWI: A Quick Reference Guide for the Enforcment of DWI and Related Statutes." If you've been charged with a DUI, we know you'll find this information helpful. Click to read the Minnesota DWI EZ Guide.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Minnesota Statutes Section 169A addresses DUI  & DWI charges in Minnesota, including first-degree driving while impaired (felony); second-degree driving while impaired (gross misdemeanor); third-degree driving while impaired (gross midemeanor); and fourth-degree driving while impaired (misdemeanor). Driving under the influence, open bottle and other crimes are contained within these statutes as well. Continue Reading...

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks