BASIC FACTS: An off-duty police officer called in to dispatch that the car in front of him was “all over the road” and had crossed the yellow line several times.  Two other, on-duty officers stopped the driver based on the caller’s description of the driver being “all over the road”.  The officer activated their blue lights and stopped the driver.  The police directed the driver through the usual medley of sidewalk gymnastics called “field sobriety tests”.  The driver allegedly failed a pen test (police call these a horizontal gaze nystagmus, or an “HGN” test), a “nine step walk and turn test”, and a “one leg stand test”.  The driver admitted drinking one mixed drink shortly prior to driving.  After the battery of the balancing tests, the officer asked the driver to submit to a hand-held, battery operated breath testing device.  The driver at first elected not to put his fate into the battery-operated gadget.  The officer then told him he would be placed under arrest for DWI.  The driver then changed his mind and said he would take the battery-operated test.  Once the driver agreed to take it however, the police realized they did not even have one on hand to give him.  They arrested the driver and charged him with DWI any way.  He declined a blood test when the police tried to get him take one.

An important note here: This defendant was very polite and courteous throughout this roadside nightmare.  This made this case an easier victory than the Case Example of the Week of June 15, 2007, during which the defendant was profane throughout the arrest!

After his arrest, the defendant hired Attorney Stevens to fight the DWI charge.

DEFENSE:     Reasonable doubt.  The case went to trial.  At trial, the state presented the testimony of the arresting officer, the back up officer, and the off-duty officer who called in the driver being “all over the road”.  Through questioning of the officers, Attorney Stevens raised doubts about the defendant’s intoxication during cross examination, including many aspects of the roadside gymnastics that the defendant performed quite well on.  At the close of the evidence, the defendant was found NOT GUILTY of DWI..       

RESULT:       NOT GUILTY!!!

Attorney Stevens thanks God for this successful defense!!!

Contact Information:
If you leave a voice message or send an email, please include ONLY the following information:

• Date of any alleged offense you have been charged with.
• The court in which you have been told to appear.
• The date and time you have been told to appear.

Information in this column should not be construed as legal advice and does not constitute an engagement of the Mark Stevens Law Office, nor any attorney associated with the Mark Stevens Law Office. The information contained herein is of a general nature and may not apply to any particular set of facts and circumstances. Please bear in mind that laws change frequently. We will make an effort to update the information on a regular basis, but are under no obligation to do so. No part of this document, nor any information contained in this website, may be disseminated without this paragraph. This may be considered legal advertising.