Law Office of Mark Stevens
5 Manor Parkway
Salem, NH 03079
Telephone: (603) 893-0074
Fax: (603) 893-5022
info@byebyedwi.com
Admitted in all state and federal courts in New Hampshire and Massachusetts. Representing clients in criminal defense matters, including narcotics charges, drunk driving charges, Driving While Intoxicated (DWI), Operating Under the Influence (OUI), and Driving Under the Influence (DUI). Representation of clients at Department of Motor Vehicles (NH) and Registry of Motor Vehicles (MA) hearings and appeals.


CASE OF THE MONTH

Sponsored by ByeByeDWI.com

CLIENT STOPPED AT ROADBLOCK FAILS THREE “FIELD SOBRIETY TESTS” AND BLOWS A .13 ON HER BREATH TEST TWICE

BASIC FACTS:  Driver stopped in a DWI roadblock on a New Hampshire Highway.  After police officer approaches her window and demands her license and registration, the officer reported that he smelled an “obvious odor of alcohol” coming from inside her car.  Upon speaking with the driver, the officer claimed he could tell the smell was coming from the driver’s breath.  The officer questioned the driver and she told him that she had three drinks.  The officer then waived the defendant’s car into a “screening area” for a battery of breakdown-lane gymnastics known as “field sobriety tests”.  On her way to the screening area the defendant ran over some of the orange cones that marked the “screening area”.

The officer ordered the defendant to get out of the car to take field sobriety tests.  The defendant agreed to take the sobriety tests.  The officer claimed that the defendant had to “lean on her car for balance” when she got out to do her field sobriety tests.  The driver performed the standard set of roadside gymnastics:  the “follow-the-pen test”, the “heel to toe test” and the “one-leg-stand test”.  The driver predictably failed all three sobriety tests.  The officer eventually arrested the driver and charged her with DWI.

At the police station, the defendant agreed to take a breath and blew a .13 twice.

DEFENSE STRATEGY:       An attack on the roadblock itself as unconstitutional.  Attorney Stevens moved to suppress all the evidence in the case because the defendant’s constitutional right to be free from illegal searches and seizures was violated, and that the roadblock was illegal.  The defense motion urged the Court to find that since the roadblock was illegal, all the evidence obtained in the roadblock must be suppressed or excluded.  Once the evidence was excluded, the defendant’s case must be dismissed.

RESULT:       MOTION TO SUPPRESS GRANTED.  CASE DISMISSED!

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:


I will call you back at the earliest opportunity. Do NOT include any specifics about your case in a recorded voice message or email. We will discuss that on the phone, and in greater detail in person.

Back to Top of This Page






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.

Original Web Page Development by Randy Bone.
Copyright 2005, Attorney Mark Stevens, All rights reserved.
All brand or product names are trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective companies or organizations.