One of the biggest mistakes people charged with a DUI make is to assume there are no real defenses that can be mounted against the charge, and that they must simply plea guilty and ask for leniency.

Many people will say that there is no way they could possibly overcome what the police officer said happened that night.  This is certainly a very common belief when people have given a breath sample at the station that resulted in a reading over 0.08 BAC.  Surprisingly, this belief is one that I have even seen attorneys that regularly handle DUIs hold.  The belief that there are no potential defenses that can be mounted, even when there is a breath or blood test result given by the driver of over 0.08 BAC, is simply false!

One of the most important reasons in selecting an attorney who is extensively trained and experienced in handling DUI charges is that they will be able to see defenses in your case that could result in an acquittal of the charges that those without such training may simply not be aware exists.  Indeed, there are simply so many defenses that are possible based on the particular facts of each case, that it is impossible to list them all.  A small sample of some of the more common types of defenses are:

-the person arrested was not actually driving or in actual physical control of the vehicle        

-the officer did not have an adequate basis to even pull your car over (For example, the observations of the officer in pulling you over may not be sufficient to constitute a traffic offense.)

-the officer did not have a basis to request you take field sobriety tests

-the officer did not administer the field sobriety tests properly (failed to give required instructions, conducted them in an area that was not flat and free of debris)

-the officer did not have probable cause to place you under arrest

-the officer did not properly give you the required information before asking you to take a breath test (this can include not given all the required information and giving misinformation)

-the driver was not afforded a reasonable opportunity to consult with an attorney before deciding whether to take the breath test

-the regulations in the proper administration of the breath test were not followed required (failed to wait the appropriate time to administer a test, the machine was not properly calibrated, medical reasons accounted for the results obtained)

-the officer failed to give Miranda before certain questioning of the driver, or gave Miranda warnings at a time that confused the driver as to the consequences involved with refusing to take a breath test

Even in cases where the officer has not committed the above errors, there are still countless defenses available at trial to prove that the conduct observed does not demonstrate impairment to drive a vehicle.  For example, officers will typically only record in their report what they determined the driver did incorrectly during the traffic stop.  Many times it can be shown, however, that the driver did most if not everything else correct so the officer is not providing an accurate and balanced report of the entire situation.  Even if all the field sobriety tests were not performed without error, this can often be attributable to medical reasons (e.g. leg injury, back problems, or overweight), situational problems (e.g. tired or not wearing the proper clothing or shoes for balancing), or because the place where the officer had the person take the field sobriety tests was not appropriate (e.g. close to traffic causes swaying, uneven area on the side of the road causing lack of balance, or bad weather makes it difficult for anyone to perform correctly).  

There are also many medical conditions that can explain observations that have nothing to do with being impaired by alcohol or drugs.  A common sign officers heavily rely on is bloodshot eyes, yet that can be easily explained by such things as lack of sleep, allergies, and wearing contacts.  As to slurred speech, again many times this can be explained by lack of sleep, or the fact that this is the first time the officer has ever heard you and that may be simply the normal way you talk.  Finally, many medications that do not impair a persons ability to drive can cause physical changes in appearance that are at times relied on by the officer mistakenly to prove impairment.

Accordingly, the possible defenses outlined above are merely the tip of the iceberg when it comes to aggressively defending DUI cases.  Of course, every case is different, and that is why an attorney who has received extensive training in DUI issues and law is so essential in finding all the potential defenses that could lead to an acquittal of the charges you face.  Many times, even if the defenses are not enough to garner an acquittal, a driver can receive a much better plea because of the weaknesses exposed by the attorney.