When you are arrested for DUI in Texas, the consequences can be life-altering because you may be subject to incarceration, significant fines, suspension or revocation of your driver’s license, community service, alcohol classes, probation and more.  In addition to these consequences, you may also end up with a criminal record that impacts housing, education and employment options.  If you are subsequently convicted of another DUI in the future, the penalties become harsher.  While these adverse consequences may be significant, there are many defenses that experienced Texas DUI attorney Alex Tyra may use to protect his clients from these penalties.

Some people facing drunken driving charges simply plead guilty because they do not realize the wide range of defenses that are available to prevent a DUI conviction.  We have provided an overview of a few of the defenses that Mr. Tyra may use to obtain a dismissal, acquittal or reduction in charges:

Unlawful Vehicle Stop

Law enforcement officers generally may not stop a vehicle without “reasonable suspicion” that the driver is engaged in unlawful activity.  In the context of DUI cases, the basis for a stop will typically be the officer’s observation of a motorist engaged in a traffic violation or a pattern of erratic driving that is symptomatic of alcohol impaired driving.  If you are stopped for a traffic or regulatory violation that has nothing to do with alcohol impaired driving, such as an illegal left turn or expired tags, the officer will look for evidence during the stop to justify initiating prolonging the stop and conducting a DUI investigation.  The officer will look for factors like slurred speech, bloodshot watery eyes, lack of coordination, odor of alcohol on your breath, or admissions of drinking to justify conducting field sobriety tests and a roadside portable breath test.

A brief mention of Sobriety Checkpoints (DUI Roadblocks) is worth mentioning because they constitute an exception to the rule that police need some basis of individualized suspicion to justify stopping a vehicle.  While the U.S. Supreme Court has permitted an exception that allows this form of stop with no basis for believing that a driver is engaged in criminal activity, there are strict requirements to prevent selective enforcement.  Although a complete discussion of these requirements is beyond the scope of this discussion, one requirement is that the determination as to which vehicle will be stopped must be based on a pre-determined formula like stopping every fifth car or every other car.  When law enforcement officers fail to comply with the strict requirements for a lawful DUI roadblock, the evidence obtained during the stop may be subject to exclusion.

If the officer cannot articulate sufficient facts to justify the initial stop or DUI investigation, this may pose a basis to file for a hearing to have all evidence suppressed, such as chemical testing of blood alcohol concentration (BAC), field sobriety tests (FSTs) and observations during the vehicle stop.  Because officers sometimes lie or distort the truth in a police report to justify their actions, we look carefully at evidence like dash video, witnesses in the vicinity and inconsistencies between the police report and the officer testimony.

We also invite you to review Part II of this blog-post for other examples of defenses that we may use to protect our clients from a DUI conviction.  Texas DUI attorney Alex Tyra offers a free consultation during which he can advise you about your legal rights and potential strategies for avoiding a DUI conviction.  We invite you to contact us in our Longview office at 903-753-7499 or visit our website and submit a case contact form.

This is Part II of our multi-part blog post discussing important information that drivers should know about field sobriety tests (FSTs) if they are stopped after consuming alcohol.  Part I of this blog provided an overview of the types of FSTs that may be administered whereas Part II focuses on key issues relevant to effectively challenging FSTS and minimizing their impact in your Texas DUI prosecution.

The starting point for any analysis of mitigating the impact of FSTs is the knowledge that these tests are completely voluntary.  When the police officer indicates that he or she wants you to participate in FSTs, he will probably not do so in a way that feels particularly like it is totally up to your discretion.  When the person making the “request” is wearing a gun and uniform with the power of arrest, it is not surprising that many motorists assume that they have no right to refuse to perform FSTs.

However, these voluntary exercises are optional and designed to create probable cause for a DUI arrest.  Generally, you should politely indicate you would prefer not to participate unless you are in good physical condition and have had absolutely nothing to drink.  Even under these circumstances, there is little to be gained by participating because FSTs are usually part of a “self-fulfilling prophecy.”  The police officer believes you will fail because you are intoxicated, and this perception will color his evaluation of your performance.  If you already were arrested for DUI and elected to participate in FSTs, here are some common defenses:

Non-Standardized Sobriety Tests Have No Probative Value:

The defense to these types of field sobriety tests is pretty straightforward.  These tests were determined by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to have no reliability in accurately identifying drivers under the influence alcohol.  Because properly trained officers will be aware that these tests offer little more accuracy than calling heads on a coin flip, these tests will usually be conducted as a supplement to the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (SFSTs).

Unreasonably High Error Rate for Individual SFSTs:

While SFSTs have more accuracy than non-standardized tests, there are many studies that show they are still highly unreliable as an indicator of alcohol impairment.  The accuracy rate of the walk and turn test, for example, is a mere 65 percent according the NHTSA.  In other words, it is only 15 percent more accurate than a coin flip.  The walk and turn is only slightly better at 68 percent while the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus is only 77 percent accurate.  These error levels do not remotely approach the “reasonable doubt” standard.  When an experienced Texas DUI defense attorney represents clients, he effectively communicates this lack of reliability to a judge or jury.

Lack of Proper Officer Training:

The huge margins for error reflected above are based on SFSTs conducted by experienced police officers under optimal conditions.  The procedures required to properly administer SFSTs are extremely detailed, including a precise demonstration of the walk and turn and one leg stand before asking a motorist to perform these exercises.  Many officers lack adequate training so they may conduct the tests improperly or fail to evaluate the performance of a motorist accurately.  This further compromises the reliability of individual field sobriety tests that are fairly unreliable even under optimal conditions.

Fictional Ordinary Person Standard:

Just as the accuracy of the three SFSTs are based on proper administration of the tests by an officer fluent in conducting these exercises, the results indicated above for individual SFSTs also are based on assumptions about a DUI suspect.  The FSTs assume a healthy person within an average range for weight and age.  Drivers who are over 65 or more than fifty pound overweight may have their results impacted adversely when performing SFSTs.  These factors must be communicated effectively to the judge or jury when they are relevant.

Medical Conditions or Injury:

There are many health conditions or injuries that can impair a motorist ability to effectively perform field sobriety tests.  Anyone suffering from a leg or knee injury, for example, might be expected to struggle with the one leg stand and/or walk and turn.  Similarly, DUI suspects with the flu may have a difficult time focusing or remaining balanced.  If you have a medical condition or injury that may inhibit your performance but elect to take SFSTs anyway, you should inform the officer prior to participating in the exercises.

Environment/Clothing:

Sometimes factors like women wearing high heels, wet ground or extreme heat may impact SFSTs.

Individual Ability:

SFSTs presume that people are comparable in terms of physical ability.  Even if a DUI suspect is not ill or injured, some people are naturally clumsier or less coordinated.  These individual factors can explain a failed FST as well as intoxication in many cases.

While this certainly is not an exhaustive list of defenses that Texas drunk driving defense attorney Alex Tyra may raise to undermine the significant of field sobriety testing, this overview does illustrate a broad range of potential issues that may be raised.  Texas DUI attorney Alex Tyra offers a free consultation during which he can advise you about your legal rights and potential strategies for avoiding a DUI conviction.  We invite you to contact us in our Longview office at 903-753-7499 or visit our website and submit a case contact form.