drunk driving offenses. The

Field Sobriety Testing Drivers

Atlanta DUI Lawyer, Georgia Drunk Driving, DUI, DWI, Criminal Defense, GA DUI Lawyers, Attorney, Atlanta DUI Attorneys CALL TODAY FOR YOUR FREE CASE EVALUATION! Toll Free: 1-877-DUI-GEOR (1-877-384-4367) FREE ONLINE CASE EVALUATION - CLICK HERE! Home About Georgia DUI Defense Lawyer William C. Head Our Lawyers Georgia DUI Law Georgia Field Sobriety Testing Drivers License Suspension Law Information Georgia Courts DUI Cases DUI Client Letters DUI Links Publications & Articles Site Map Georgia FIELD SOBRIETY EVALUATIONS OR “TESTS” Motorists suspected of DUI / DWI are routinely asked by police officers to perform one or more field sobriety exercises. These voluntary “tests” (yes, voluntary) were developed by police agencies to assist law enforcement officers in making roadside determinations as to whether a motorist is under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Through the performance of these tests or evaluations, the officer subjectively determines how the motorist reacts to and performs the requested tasks. Almost EVERY knowledgeable DUI / DWI attorney will say to you, “NO. Don’t attempt ANY ‘field tests’---EVER.” That is because many studies have concluded that the SFSTs are “designed to fail”. Police officer administering Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN) Evaluation as part of a police arrest. Officer may use finger, penlight or other object as the stimulus. Don't submit to ANY field evaluations in Georgia, since the Georgia Constitution permits you to politely decline such "testing" at the roadway. A motorist's alleged poor performance on field evaluations may provide the “probable cause” (legal justification) an officer needs to arrest a person for impaired driving and may also become part of the proof used to later convict the person at trial. See Parrish v. State, 216 Ga. App. 832, 456 S.E.2d 283 (1995). Therefore, it is very important that, in defending you, your defense attorney know as much or more about these tests as the police, if he or she is going to defend you. One sure way to know that your attorney is up to date: is your lawyer “NHTSA certified”? Certified as a “student”? Or certified as an “instructor”. Ask him/her. This training has been available to defense attorneys since 1994, and over 1000 attorneys nationwide have received the training. Mr. Head is an SFST instructor, and has taught or helped teach these evaluations to over 300 other defense lawyers. Counsel for the defense should challenge the subjective nature of the evaluations, the accuracy of the principles behind the tests, the accuracy of the administration of the tests, the credibility of the officer who “requested” the tests, and challenge all circumstances connected with the evaluations. The attorney representing you must attack the factual and legal issues that may arise regarding the officer's scoring and evaluation of the field tests. Only three tests have been “scientifically” studied (in lengthy studies paid for by the federal government) and represented to have any measure of reliability in helping an officer predict whether a subject is above a certain legal limit (0.10 BAC, in the original testing). These tests, known as the “standardized field sobriety tests” [SFSTs], were designed pursuant to numerous federal grants and ultimately sanctioned by NHTSA (the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration) beginning in 1984. These three tests are (1) the walk and turn [WAT] test, (2) the one leg stand [OLS] test, and (3) the horizontal gaze nystagmus [HGN] test. However, the manuals (plural here, because 6 separate versions have now been released) say that if not performed properly, or if conducted without adhering to the training protocols, such actions “compromise” the validity of these evaluations. Starting in the 1970’s, NHTSA began studying and funding “field tests” to see if any of the dozens of police exercises had any correlation to showing if a drinking driver had a blood alcohol level of 0.10 grams percent or higher. The “studies” determined that only the three named evaluations had any reliable correlation better than 50-50 (flipping a coin and guessing ‘heads’, being a 50-50 reliability test, for example) to identify a person having a BAC of 0.10% or more. These evaluations in no way were used to determine whether a driver is impaired . . . only whether the person may be 0.10 or more. The HGN evaluation, when performed correctly on proper subjects, had a 77% “claimed” reliability rating. The WAT exercise, when conducted properly on a qualified subject on a dry, level surface, was found to be 68% reliable. The OLS exercise, when conducted properly, on a qualified subject on a level, dry surface and under proper instructions and where correctly demonstrated and scored, reportedly yields about 65% reliability. Cumulatively, if all are done correctly, up to 83% correlation to a BAC of 0.10% or more may be expected. Knowledgeable criminal defense lawyers know that 98% or more of the officers administering these evaluations do them wrong, or conduct them in a manner (or on a test subject) not approved by the SFST manual, or grade the evaluations improperly, as per the manual, or ALL OF THE ABOVE. When done incorrectly, these evaluations have ZERO predicted reliability. Hence, a top-notch DUI/DWI lawyer can cross-examine the arresting officer using his/her OWN training materials that the federal government and YOUR state government have approved. Recent research and scientific review of the testing protocols and scoring methodology have brought the NHTSA “Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (“SFSTs”) into serious question. Courts across America are taking a closer look at the original research, to see if proper scientific methods were employed in the initial research. More and more courts are now saying “no” to these questions. In a recent New Mexico case, a high-level court has declared that the person who “developed” the tests (Dr. Marcelline Burns) was not qualified to testify as an expert witness about the scientific principles behind the HGN test. (Lasworth v. State, 42 P.2d 844 (N.M. App. 2001).) HISTORIC ROOTS Prior to the 1980's and NHTSA's studies on field testing, police officers across America were taught a wide variety of “tests” to be given to persons stopped for suspected drunk driving. Most of these “tests” had never been studied to determine “fairness” or accuracy in detecting either impaired drivers or drivers who were operating a vehicle while their BAC level was 0.10 BAC or more. Moreover, no standardized method (that is, not being done the same way by officers who used these tests) of scoring or grading these tests had been attempted. Simply stated, the decision to arrest was based upon the subjective whim of the officer. Mistakes were made in a large percentage of cases. Tests given by some officers may have included reciting the alphabet (or a portion thereof), picking up coins off the ground, or touching index fingers to the tip of the nose while the person’s eyes were closed and head tilted back. Some involved strange, one-legged tapping on the roadway with a raised foot (similar to what that famous television horse, Mr. Ed, used to do). These “made-up” tests were administered to subjects without any scientific or empirical basis for reliability in detecting an impaired driver. These tests were designed for failure, not for fairness. Even worse, police officers often forced people to perform these voluntary evaluations, thereby violating these citizens’ rights. Some “non-standardized” tests were so ridiculous and difficult that proof of non-validity was easy with almost any jury or judge. Today, officers who lack NHTSA training invariably cannot cite any studies or scientific research which “validated” their tests, the scoring (e.g., “pass” or “fail”) or their testing methods. Almost always, no scoring system is used on tests which do not adhere to NHTSA guidelines. If non-standardized tests are used, the number of errors that are required for a subject to fail is totally subjective with each officer. Hence, the untrained officer is usually an easy target for a skilled and knowledgeable criminal defense attorney who knows the “limitations” of these field tests. THE ISSUE OF THE ``SCIENCE'' OF FIELD TESTING A great rift exists among scientific experts on the question of whether field sobriety tests are ``scientific.'' For example, Georgia's appellate courts have blown hot and cold on this subject. Torrance v. State, 217 Ga. App. 562, 458 S.E.2d 495 (1995); Manley v. State, 206 Ga. App. 281, 424 S.E.2d 818 (1992); Foster v. State, 204 Ga. App. 632, 420 S.E.2d 78 (1992); Crawford v. City of Forest Park, 215 Ga. App. 234, 450 S.E.2d 237 (1994) [holding that field tests given by the arresting officer were not ``a scientific procedure,'' but ``simply a behavioral observation on the officer's part'']; Hassell v. State, 212 Ga. App. 432, 442 S.E.2d 261 (1994); Hawkins v. State, 223 Ga. App. 34, 476 S.E.2d 803 (1996). Challenges to field sobriety tests based upon proof of a scientific foundation by an expert have been rejected by the court of appeals. Druitt v. State, 225 Ga. App. 150, 483 S.E.2d 117 (1997). See also Padgett v. State, 230 Ga. App. 659, 498 S.E.2d 84 (1998), where the court of appeals held that field sobriety tests are merely dexterity exercises and the word ``tests'' is a misnomer. The reason that most credible scientists across America (and in other countries) are unwilling to categorize field tests -- even NHTSA's tests -- as being “scientific” is that too many variables are involved in roadside testing to ever eliminate pure chance and non-controlled circumstances from the equation (e.g., environmental conditions such as lighting and roadway slope). Numerous states, including Texas, Alabama and Mississippi, do not permit HGN evidence to be admitted at trial. The reason behind this is that these “party games” (as noted Swedish scientist Dr. A.W. Jones has called them) do not pass well-established rules f evidence (the court rules for determining when certain types of information may be told to the jury) for scientifically acceptable tests. Even NHTSA admits that under optimal conditions (i.e., in an air-conditioned, well lighted room) 35% of sober, drug-free subjects get inaccurate results on the one leg stand test, 32% of sober subjects get flawed results on the walk and turn, and 23% of sober subjects are inaccurately said to be “over the legal limit” on the horizontal gaze nystagmus test. By comparison, polygraph (lie detector) tests are more than 90% accurate when conducted by a qualified operator), and (absent a stipulation by both parties) are still not permitted into evidence by most courts. Issues of unreliability and lack of scientific validity cannot be extensively addressed on this website. The author commends the following articles for your study of this fascinating subject: (1) Nowaczyk, Ronald H., and Cole, Spurgeon, Separating Myth from Fact: A Review of Research on the Field Sobriety Tests, NACDL Champion Magazine, August, 1995, p. 40. (2) Cowan, Jonathan D., Proof and Disproof of Alcohol-Induced Driving Impairment Through Evidence of Observable Intoxication and Coordination Testing, 9 Am Jur Proof of Facts 3d, p. 459 (1990). (3) Cowan, Jonathan D., Proof and Disproof of Alcohol-Induced Impairment Through Breath Alcohol Testing, 4 Am Jur Proof of Facts 3d, p. 229 (1989). (4) Trichter & Peña, DWI/DUI Field Sobriety Testing Revisited, NACDL Champion Magazine, August, 1996, p. 17. (5) Price, Phillip B., Sr., Field Sobriety Testing, NACDL Champion Magazine, August, 1996, p. 46. THESE ARE VOLUNTARY TESTS Only a small number of states have tried to pass laws to make the field tests not be 100% voluntary. These states typically will assess a monetary fine against someone who says “no” to these voluntary tests. So what? I tell all my fiends and relatives and clients: DON’T ATTEMPT THESE TESTS. Other states have said that the State Constitution provides that no person can be compelled to take such tests. Case law in virtually all U.S. jurisdictions indicates that if a person is being detained or is “in custody,” no field tests can be given without first providing Miranda advisements (i.e., right to remain silent; right to an attorney; if you can’t afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you). State v. O'Donnell, 225 Ga. App. 502, 484 S.E.2d 313 (1997). Hence, the new focus for defense attorneys is to establish that some sort of ``custody'' or detention has occurred prior to the field tests. See also Price v. State, 269 Ga. 222, 498 S.E.2d 262 (1998). However, many appellate courts have bent over backward to ignore clear signs of custody. For example, despite guns being drawn on a driver, the Georgia Court of Appeals (in Hassell v. State---see citation above) ruled that this was not “custody”. Of course, this is a ridiculous ruling, but part of “Georgia law,” regardless. Other courts have stood tall and said “if NHTSA tests are supposed to be scientific, then they must be done correctly”. The previously mentioned Lasworth case from the New Mexico Court of Appeals is just such a case. The Supreme Court of Ohio recently held that the officer’s failure to fol­low NHTSA training in administering field sobriety exercises was a factor in determining the admissibility of the test. State v. Homan, 732 N.E.2d 952 (Ohio 2000). In Homan, a NHTSA-trained officer’s admitted failure to administer the field sobriety exercises in strict compliance with NHTSA’s standardized testing procedures invalidated (and excluded) all of the State’s evidence about the field sobriety exercises. The Homan court made the following findings regarding the unreliability of field tests not conducted in compliance with NHTSA procedure: When field sobriety testing is conducted in a manner that departs from established methods and procedures, the results are inherently unreliable. In an extensive study, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (“NHTSA”) evaluated field sobriety tests in terms of their utility in determining whether a subject’s blood-alco­hol concentration is below or above the legal limit. The NHTSA con­cluded that field sobriety tests are an effective means of detecting legal intoxication “only when: the tests are administered in the pre­scribed, standardized manner[,] . . . the standardized clues are used to assess the suspect’s performance[, and] . . . the standardized cri­teria are employed to interpret that performance.” National High­way Traffic Safety Adm., U.S. Dept. of Transp., HS 178 R2/00, DWI Detection and Standardized Field Sobriety Testing, Student Manual (2000), at VIII-3. According to the NHTSA, “[i]f any one of the standardized field sobriety test elements is changed, the validity is compromised.” Id. Experts in the areas of drunk driving apprehension, prosecution, and defense all appear to agree that the reliability of field sobriety test results does indeed turn upon the degree to which police comply with standardized testing procedures. See, e.g., 1 Erwin, Defense of Drunk Driving Cases (3 Ed.1997), Section 10.06[4]; Cohen & Green, Apprehending and Prosecuting the Drunk Driver: A Manual for Police and Prosecution (1997), Section 4.01. ROADSIDE ALCOHOL SCREENING TESTS A portable breath testing device may be used by police officers in determining whether or not a motorist is under the influence of alcohol. Some states have banned the use of these voluntary “non-evidential” screening devices. “Non-evidential” means that “the digital number” can’t be used against you in court. Some states have ruled that the only place at trial that these can be used is at a pre-trial hearing at which “probable cause” for arrest is involved. Like other “field tests”, these devices are used at the roadway. Often, police officers do not regularly check the devices for calibration. Furthermore, the manufacturer’s instructions (e.g., failing to observe a 15 minute deprivation period, waiting at least 4 minutes between tests, or clearing the prior test results) for proper use are routinely ignored. Some states have started using these roadside testers as evidential tests. This is accomplished when a small printer is attached to the breath test apparatus. Unless your state uses such a device as an OFFICIAL state-mandated breath test, no person should ever submit to these devices and risk a false positive result and almost certain arrest. Politely DECLINE to give this voluntary sample, if it is not the official state test. THE NEWEST “VOODOO” SCIENCE: THE “DEC” PROGRAM TO IDENTIFY DRUG USE Government studies have revealed that many drivers are under the influence of drugs, or a combination of alcohol and drugs. To combat this, an effort has been mounted since the early 1990’s to add some type of training to the police officer's arsenal that will assist in identifying drug-impaired individuals. Hence, NHTSA has created the ``Drug Evaluation and Classification'' (DEC) Program. A DEC officer does not typically work in the field (i.e., making traffic arrests), or make the initial arrest of an impaired driver. A DEC officer is called in after a subject either shows a low score on an alcohol test, or otherwise ‘smells’ like or ‘acts’ like he/she has been using drugs. The proper procedure is for the DEC officer to give Miranda warnings to the person (already in custody), and then start “the evaluation for drug usage”. SIMPLE RULE: SAY NO! You have just been told of your constitutional rights---USE THEM! Say nothing and do nothing beyond say, “I’d like to speak to an attorney.” More information on Your Constitutional Rights. The function of DEC is to ascertain: (a) Whether the person is impaired by something; (b) If impaired, is it from drugs as opposed to alcohol; (c) If the impairment appears to be from drugs, what ``manifestations'' or visible indicia of impairment would indicate the TYPE or CATEGORY of drug being used? As opposed to trying to target a single ``impairing'' chemical, the DEC process seeks to ``recognize'' indications of any of seven broad categories of drugs: (1) Central nervous system depressants, such as Valium, Xanax or alcohol; (2) Central nervous system stimulants (e.g., crack or powder cocaine); (3) Hallucinogens, such as L.S.D.; (4) Phencyclidine, such as P.C.P. (which can manifest itself as a stimulant, depressant or hallucinogen, and is highly unpredictable); (5) Inhalants, such as glues or other aerosol products, which block the passage of oxygen to the brain; (6) Narcotic analgesics, such as Demerol, Dilaudid, opium, heroin, Methadone and other powerful pain relievers; and (7) Cannabis (marijuana and its ``family'' of psychoactive plants.) [For more detailed information on all types of common drugs, click here.] The hope of the police is that these DEC evaluations can be used in court to identify impairment from drugs even if the person refuses all blood and urine testing. Absent a blood or urine test or an admission of recent drug use, “opinion” testimony must be based upon something more than a wild guess or speculation. Ironically, NHTSA designed the DEC Program for post-arrest investigation, to be done in a carefully controlled environment (as opposed to “field” evaluation). Numerous “task force” officers across America have taken IACP-approved DEC classes to enable them to identify a subject impaired by drugs. IACP is the acronym for International Association of Chiefs of Police. Sometimes referred to as “DREs” or “DRTs” (drug recognition experts or drug recognition technicians), these officers utilize a series of simple evaluations and observations to help them identify individuals impaired by drugs. Interestingly, even the IACP recognizes the limitations of the DEC program. For example, the agency recognizes that DEC-trained officers cannot identify exactly what drug (or drugs) a person is “on.” Only one of the seven broad “categories” listed might be identified, if the person has been fully trained and certified. IACP has emphasized the need for an analytical chemical test (such as a GC-MS test) to confirm the officer's “suspicions” about drug use. This is because anything less than a chemical test is just “an educated GUESS”. The law does not support guesswork in criminal trials, because the State must prove guilt BEYOND A REASONABL DOUBT. The DEC process includes an alcohol screening evaluation on a roadside screening device such as an Alco-Sensor. It also includes administering the NHTSA standardized field sobriety tests. The twelve components of the DEC process include: (1) A breath alcohol screening test to determine an estimated BAC level; (2) Interviewing the arresting officer, to see what was seen or heard in earlier contact; (3) The preliminary examination, including questions to determine pre-existing injury, or the existence of a health or mental condition that may mimic drug use; (4) Eye examination, using both horizontal and vertical nystagmus tests, plus checking to see if the eyes converge properly; (5) Divided attention tests, including walk and turn, one-leg stand, finger to nose and the Romberg balance test; (6) Vital signs examination, checking pulse rate, blood pressure and temperature; (7) Dark room examination, including measurement of pupil size, reaction of the eyes to light and tell-tale evidence of ingestion of drugs by nose or by mouth; (8) Examination of muscle tone -- Depending on the type of drug used, muscles can be rigid or flaccid. Examination is performed from the bicep to the wrist; (9) Looking for injection sites, (i.e., needle marks or “tracks”) on the arms, neck, legs, etc.; (10) Questioning the suspect -- After giving all the required “constitutional and statutory” advisements, ask the subject questions concerning the drug or drugs suspected to be involved; (11) The opinion of the DEC evaluator is used to summarize the “findings” and to fill out reports designed to document the observed facts which support the officer's conclusions; and (12) A toxicological examination (blood test) to provide scientific, admissible evidence to substantiate the DEC evaluator's conclusions. (This assumes that a person submits to the test offered, where an option to NOT do so exists.) A properly equipped DEC officer will have these items with him or her: (a) blood pressure kit; (b) an electronic aneroid thermometer; (c) a pupillometer (to measure the size of the subject's pupils); (d) a preliminary alcohol screening device, such as an Alco-Sensor; and (e) access to a dark room. The DEC protocol teaches officers to not only look for either contraband (illegal) or controlled substances (i.e., those drugs which cannot be purchased without a prescription), but to take note of over-the-counter medications that the subject has ingested which may have caused or contributed to the suspect's impairment. Certain allergy and cold medicines have been determined by the American Medical Association and FDA to be particularly unsafe for persons who are driving. These include Benadryl, Allerdryl, Contac Severe Cold Formula, Vicks Nyquil, Trifed, Phenergan and others. Although the use of DEC evaluations by “DRE” officers requires extensive training, this is a wave of the future. Decisions in several states have upheld DEC evaluations by DRE officers, utilizing both a Daubert analysis and a Frye analysis of admissibility. Daubert and Frye are well-known federal cases that have carved out the rules of when and after what type of judicial review scientific evidence can be admitted at a trial. About 45 of the 50 states follow one standard or the other. See State v. Klawitter, 518 N.W.2d 577 (Minn. 1994) [using a Daubert analysis] and People v. Quinn, 580 N.Y.S.2d 818 (Suffolk County Dist. Ct. 1991), rev'd and remanded on other grounds, 607 N.Y.S.2d 534 (Sup. Ct. App. Term 1993) [using a Frye analysis]. See State v. Sampson, 6 P.3d 543 (Or.App. 2000) for a fascinating analysis of prior DEC admissibility in various states. As with other “pro-prosecution” types of “scientific” evidence, expect courts to overrule objections to DEC evaluations based on highly discretionary trial court review of “proper” evidence. The need of the State to “make our highways safe” will likely outweigh the “voodoo” nature of the DEC “opinion” evidence. The best hope for the defense is that a fair-minded judge will look at the highly irregular nature of this evidence and declare “the State has not laid a proper foundation for this scientific evidence. Therefore, this evidence is excluded.” National Drunk Driving Defense - Find the best attorney to represent your case. If you are facing a DUI/DWI/OWI/OUI/OMVI charge in any state, you can find legal help here. Protect your legal rights and license. Free online legal information and questionnaire. Visit us at www.dui-dwi.com for more information. Disclaimer and Terms of Use | Home Other Resources: DUI Expungement Lawyers - Clear Your Record | DUI Laws - Drunk Driving Lawyers DWI Laws - Drunk Driving Lawyers | Drunk Driving Defense | DUI Attorneys © 2004-2005, Headlines Marketing Corporation • All Rights Reserved

DUI Help - Alcohol and Drug Abuse Issues Everything You Need to Know About First Offender DUI / DWI, Drinking Driving and Drugs Home | State By State Help | DUI Lawyers | Insurance Help | Breath Testers | DUI Videos Google Search Results Alcohol and Drug Abuse Issues How Much/Little Can I Drink? Blood Alcohol Impairment Chart Alcohol and Digestion Report on Alcohol & Health Alcoholism - NIH Definition Assessing Alcoholism Youth Drinking - Risks and Factors Drinking and Ethnicity Men and Women Drinking Drinking and the Liver Physicians Guide to Assessing Alcohol Dependence Q and A on Alcoholism and Dependence Withdrawal Symptoms Practitioners - Alcohol and Drugs Rutgers Univ Study - Domestic Violence and Addiction Study on DUI and Accidents Effects of Alcohol Rutgers Univ Alcohol Related Links Research on Prevention in Adolescents DUI Employers Beware of Serving Alcohol DUI Cost to California Businesses Kaiser Hospital Assess Cost Of Alcohol Use/Abuse Do You Know Someone In Trouble with Alcohol? What's TODAY'S Acceptable Drinking Limits? Are You a Problem Drinker? ABC Offers Internet Subscription Abercrombie and Fitch Deletes Alcohol Catalog Alburquerque Stops Drive Up Alcohol Sales Merck May Sell Anti-Alcohol Drug in U.S. Of Interest - Biblical References to Alcohol Old German Drinking Pictures 1600's Early Intervention Proves Effective NHTSA Alcohol Facts Robert and Sharon Speak Out - For Tiffany Online Alcohol Screening Test Research On Why Two Drinks Help The Heart Addiction Bibliography Alcohol and Drug Resources - Links Hair Analysis As a Drug Detector - from NCJRS Absolut TV Ads? AMA Puts Out Electronic Ban on Alcohol Advertising Is Beer Drinking As Natural As Eating Broccoli? Do Colleges Tolerate Binging? LSU Student Dies with BAC .588 Sigma Nu Bans Alcohol Teenage Fact Sheet Gene Link To Alcoholism Drinking Raises Estogen Levels DUI and Teens - A Study Elderly Alcoholics India Looks to Prohibition King Tut's Brew - The Most Expensive Beer? Kudzu and Sobriety NHTSA Estimates Crash Cost To Americans NHTSA Incentive To California DUI Efforts Alcohol and Women Last Update: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 Home > Alcohol and Drug Abuse Issues DISCLAIMER : This website provides only general information intended for those charged with drunk driving offenses. The information and news items on the site are for information only. This information is not legal advice, nor is it intended to create any binding advisory relationship. Do not take action based upon this information unless you consult with an attorney or other specialist. © 2005 Drivers Research Institute   All Rights Reserved   Send eMail   Advertise With Us

DWI Introduction More than

Untitled Document Contents The DWI Detection Guide Explanations of the 24 driving cues Summary A description of post-stop cues thatare predictive of DWI Introduction More than a million people have died in traffic crashes in the UnitedStates since 1966, the year of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle SafetyAct, which led to the creation of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration,or NHTSA. During the late 1960s and early 1970s more than 50,000 people lost theirlives each year on our nation's streets, roads and highways. Traffic safetyhas improved considerably since that time: the annual death toll has declinedsubstantially, even though the numbers of drivers, vehicles, and miles drivenall have increased. When miles traveled are considered, the likelihood ofbeing killed in traffic during the 1960s was three to four times what itis today. The proportion of all crashes in which alcohol is involved also has declined.The declines in crash risk and the numbers of alcohol-involved crashes areattributable to several factors, including the effectiveness of public informationand education programs, traffic safety legislation, a general aging of thepopulation, and law enforcement effort. NHTSA research contributed to the improved condition, in part, by providingpatrol officers with useful and scientifically valid information concerningthe behaviors that are most predictive of impairment. Continued enforcementof DWI laws will be a key to saving lives in the future. For this reason,NHTSA sponsored research leading to the development of a new DWI detectionguide and training materials, including a new training video. Many thingshave changed since 1979, but like the original training materials, the newdetection guide describes a set of behaviors that can be used by officersto detect motorists who are likely to be driving while impaired. Building upon the previous NHTSA study, the researchers interviewed officersfrom across the United States and developed a list of more than 100 drivingcues that have been found to predict blood alcohol concentrations, or BACs,of 0.08 percent or greater. The list was reduced to 24 cues during threefield studies involving hundreds of officers and more than 12,000 enforcementstops. The driving behaviors identified by the officers are presented inthe following four categories: 1) Problems in maintaining proper lane position, 2 ) Speed and braking problems, 3) Vigilance problems, and 4) Judgment problems. The cues presented in these categories predict that a driver is DWI atleast 35 percent of the time. For example, if you observe a driver to beweaving or weaving across lane lines, the probability of DWI is more than.50, or 50 percent. However, if you observe either of the weaving cues andany other cue listed in this booklet, the probability of DWI jumps to atleast .65, or 65 percent. Observing any two cues other than weaving indicatesa probability of DWI of at least 50 percent, although some cues, such asswerving, accelerating for no reason, and driving on other than the designatedroadway, have single-cue probabilities greater than 70 percent. Generally,the probability of DWI increases substantially when a driver exhibits morethan one of the cues. The research suggests that these training materials will be helpful toofficers in: Detecting impaired motorists, Articulating observed behaviors on arrest reports, and Supporting officers' expert testimony. Back to Top

DWI Attorney

DUI Montana MT - Drunk Driving Defense Arrest Guide sitemap RSSFeeds DUI-HELPMenu LawyerDirectory FreeConsultation Bookstore Mission Editorial SelfEvaluation FAQ/ Info Callan Attorney Science Surveys Search More... StatePages GoTo Menu Montana Beaverhead County Big Horn County Blaine County Broadwater County Carbon County Carter County Cascade County Chouteau County Custer County Daniels County Dawson County Deer Lodge County Fallon County Fergus County Flathead County Gallatin County Garfield County Glacier County Golden Valley County Granite County Hill County Jefferson County Judith Basin County Lake County Lewis and Clark County Liberty County Lincoln County Madison County McCone County Meagher County Mineral County Missoula County Musselshell County Park County Petroleum County Phillips County Pondera County Powder River County Powell County Prairie County Ravalli County Richland County Roosevelt County Rosebud County Sanders County Sheridan County Silver Bow County Stillwater County Sweet Grass County Teton County Toole County Treasure County Valley County Wheatland County Wibaux County Yellowstone County Yellowstone National Park County Lawyers Elsewhere 500+DUI law firms Did You Know? You can purchase Drunk Driving Defense related books here on this site.Click Books for more information. DUI Law Montana Takethis Computerized Quiz Legal QuestionsAnswered Stateof Montana Map Info SelfEvaluation QUIZ Find AnAttorney HERE !! DUI BLOG - DWI BLOG - OWI BLOG - OUIL BLOG What was yourblood alcohol level? Important Note: There is no blood alcohol calculator that is 100% accurate because ofthe number of factors that come into play regarding the consumption andreduction (burnoff) rates of different people. Factors include the sex(male/female)of the drinker, differing metabolism rates, various health issues andthe combination of medications that might be taken, drinking frequency,amount of food in the stomach and small intestine and when it waseaten, elapsed time, and others. The best that can be done is a roughestimation of the BAC level based on known inputs. See More ... Whatdoes it mean to beabove the legal limit fordrinking? The“legal limit for drinking” is the alcohol levelabove which an individual is subject to legal penalties (e.g., loss ofa driver's license). Typically, this alcohol level is measured in bloodor breath, using either a blood alcohol test or a breathalyzer,respectively. Legal limits are defined by a government entity (e.g.,state legislature or regulatory agency), and are specific to thesituation that a person is in (e.g., driving a car) as well as thecharacteristics of the person themselves (e.g., their age). Forexample, in most states, the current legal limit for operating a motorvehicle is 0.08%, or 80 mg/dL among drivers who are age 21 years orolder. However, there is zero tolerance for drivers who are underage 21 years, meaning that they are not allowed to operate a motorvehicle with any alcohol in their system. In contrast, thelegal limit is 0.04% or 40 mg/dL for commercial truck drivers.Different legal limits also apply to airline pilots, bus drivers, andto persons operating recreational watercraft. However, it is importantto recognize that the legal limit does not define a level belowwhich it is safe to operate a vehicle or engage in some otheractivity rather, the legal limit is intended to define a level at orabove which an individual is subject to legal action under a specificset of circumstances. Therefore, decisions about the appropriate levelof alcohol consumption in a particular situation should begin with acareful assessment of whether it’s appropriate to be drinking atall. See More ... FAARegulations forPilots Under14 CFR 61.15, all pilots arerequired to submit a notification letter to AMC-700, within 60 calendardays ofthe effective date of an alcohol-related conviction or administrativeaction.For purposes of 14 CFR 61.15(c), alcohol-related convictions oradministrativeactions are referred to as motor vehicle actions (MVA). An administrative action consistsof a suspension, cancellation, or revocation of a driver license.Examples ofadministrative actions include a suspension, cancellation, orrevocation of adriver license for driving with an excessive blood alcohol level orrefusal tosubmit to a chemical or blood test. Airmen should be aware that thenature andduration of administrative actions varies among the states. Forinstance, somestates, such as North Carolina, provide for a 10-day civil revocationforrefusing to test. Other states may impose a lengthy suspension (e.g. 90- 180days) for a similar violation. See More ... What is the Mission of the ImpairedDriving Division? Themission of the Impaired Driving Division is to develop partnershipsto cooperatively save lives, prevent injuries, and reducetraffic-related health care and economic costs resulting from impaireddriving (alcohol and other drugs). See More ... ==================================================================== Before someonequestions any attorney listed at any site, understand ... If one does a couple of things at this site, they'll bewell informed. UnderlinedText is a DUI-Help.com Link for more information . 1. Takethe SelfEvaluation DUI DWI Defense Quiz ; 2. Submitto the ConfidentialFree Consultation Questionnaire ,and; 3.Interview with at least three DUI DWI Defense DirectoryLawyers before you miss deadlines. 4. Email them all you want! Listen: Even the nicestpeople can find themselves in a DUI situation. The serious consequencesdo not discriminate among any type of individual background. This is atime when you need to have forthright guidance and receive aggressiverepresentation. We are most aware of this and provide as much help andsupport as soon as possible after arrest. Our site is very easy to use. Besides all theinformation ( left frame )available for you to peruse, you may also contact the DUI DWI defenseexperts immediately here. Unlike other lawyer directories, allthe information you would need is included in this site. Simply post an email oruse the CallBack system tophone one of our DWI experts in your state or province .Please take a moment to review the information in addition toresearching a DUI expert attorney. Even with an attorney it is stillvitally important that you familiarize yourself with the issues in yourcase before you shop for an attorney. =================== Everyone is entitled to thepresumption of innocence. Without this guarantee, our system is a totalmockery of justice. You are entitled to compassionate and truthfulguidance through the obstacles you face and the possibilities ofovercoming them. You need an attorney who will fight for your rightsand provide you with the emotional support you need. You can count onthis type of legal representation should you choose to accept one of us. What should you get out of your attorney clientrelationship with one of the experts? Hopefully, you keep a legitimatedriver's license and stay out of jail - i.e. you'll not be convicted ofa drunk driving related charge. We give you the legal help you needright now. Take advantage of our no obligation consultations and emailquestionnaires. Use DUI-Help.com for free consultation(s) and review ofyour DUI / DWI / OUI / OWI arrest or lawsuit. Find OutMore - Many More Links in the Left Frame ~ NewAttorney Listings - Begin Here Alllawyers, attorneys andlaw firms listed are responsible for their advertising. Before hiringany professional, please check them out with your local State BarAssociation or Better Business Bureau. DUI-Help.com is solely adirectory similar to any telephone book. We have no control of theprofessional's administration of legal duties in your case. 1996-2006© DUI-Help.com. All rights reserved. Alexa Report DRUNKDRIVING DUI DWI ARRESTS IN ALLCOUNTIES AND CITIES OF MONTANA Anaconda-DeerLodge County Belgrade Billings Bozeman Butte-Silver Bow (balance) Columbia Falls Conrad Cut Bank Deer Lodge Dillon Glasgow Glendive Great Falls Hamilton Hardin Havre Helena Kalispell Laurel Lewistown Libby Livingston Miles Missoula Polson Shelby Sidney Whitefish Wolf Point at the National Safety Council Drug ImpairedDriving How Good Drivers Get Killed , a special report fromReader's Digest Get Your Own Breathalyzer! _ Just One Night toorder video We hope you never get arrested for drinkingand driving. Read on ... OurAmazonBookstore will let you find thebest defense for your case if you don't have an attorney, buy theirbooks! BOOKSTORE Translatethis Site! Chinese French German Italian Korean Japanese Portuguese Spanish and others just cut & paste www.DUI-Help.com DUI-Help.combecomes 1st niche drunk driving defense website on the internet. Firsttooffer free consultations by email, call back, or CGI form. DUI-Help.comout performs LegalMatch, Findlaw, LawInfo and all others in drunkdriving defenseassistance to the public. HAVE LAWYER CALL YOU A.C.L.U.Police Bust Card available Policeabuse is a serious national problem -- and one that especially affectsyoung people and people of color. While many police officers do striveto be courteous, and while we all understand the stress and dangerinvolved in policing, each of us has the right to be treated withrespect -- and without abuse -- by the police ... FULL ACLUPAGE - Download Card IsYour Mugshot on the Web ? Do You Need a Degreein Drinking Alcohol ?

DWAI DWI Law New

DWAI New York NY - Drunk Driving Defense Arrest Guide sitemap RSSFeeds DUI-HELPMenu LawyerDirectory FreeConsultation Bookstore Mission Editorial SelfEvaluation FAQ/ Info Callan Attorney Science Surveys Search More... StatePages GoTo Menu New York Albany County Allegany County Bronx County Broome County Cattaraugus County Cayuga County Chautauqua County Chemung County Chenango County Clinton County Columbia County Cortland County Delaware County Dutchess County Erie County Essex County Franklin County Fulton County Genesee County Greene County Hamilton County Herkimer County Jefferson County Kings County Lewis County Livingston County Madison County Monroe County Montgomery County Nassau County New York County Niagara County Oneida County Onondaga County Ontario County Orange County Orleans County Oswego County Otsego County Putnam County Queens County Rensselaer County Richmond County Rockland County Saint Lawrence County Saratoga County Schenectady County Schoharie County Schuyler County Seneca County Steuben County Suffolk County Sullivan County Tioga County Tompkins County Ulster County Warren County Washington County Wayne County Westchester County Wyoming County Yates County Lawyers Elsewhere 500+DUI law firms Did You Know? You can purchase Drunk Driving Defense related books here on this site.Click Books for more information. DWAI DWI Law New York Takethis Computerized Quiz Legal QuestionsAnswered Stateof New York Map Info SelfEvaluation QUIZ Find AnAttorney HERE !! DUI BLOG - DWI BLOG - OWI BLOG - OUIL BLOG 7/13/2005 - USlags others on DWI toughness Newsday - Long Island,NY,USA ... the standard is .03 percent blood-alcohol content -- but zerotolerance in the practical sense -- a driver can be arrested andcharged with DWI after having ... 7/13/2005 - FORMERWarren County DA Charged with DWI Empire Journal - Chestertown,NY,USA ... Hendley refused to lodge a charge of vehicular homicide or othercharges against Smith, instead prosecuting him only on a DWI charge. ... 2/20/2005 - Lohan's dad arrested afterfiery crash NEW YORK (AP) -- The father of teen moviestar Lindsay Lohan was arrested Saturday following a fiery car crashand charged with driving while intoxicated, police said. NEWYORK (AP) -- The father of teen movie star Lindsay Lohan was arrestedSaturday following a fiery car crash and charged with driving whileintoxicated, police said. ... What was yourblood alcohol level? Important Note: There is no blood alcohol calculator that is 100% accurate because ofthe number of factors that come into play regarding the consumption andreduction (burnoff) rates of different people. Factors include the sex(male/female)of the drinker, differing metabolism rates, various health issues andthe combination of medications that might be taken, drinking frequency,amount of food in the stomach and small intestine and when it waseaten, elapsed time, and others. The best that can be done is a roughestimation of the BAC level based on known inputs. See More ... Whatdoes it mean to beabove the legal limit fordrinking? The“legal limit for drinking” is the alcohol levelabove which an individual is subject to legal penalties (e.g., loss ofa driver's license). Typically, this alcohol level is measured in bloodor breath, using either a blood alcohol test or a breathalyzer,respectively. Legal limits are defined by a government entity (e.g.,state legislature or regulatory agency), and are specific to thesituation that a person is in (e.g., driving a car) as well as thecharacteristics of the person themselves (e.g., their age). Forexample, in most states, the current legal limit for operating a motorvehicle is 0.08%, or 80 mg/dL among drivers who are age 21 years orolder. However, there is zero tolerance for drivers who are underage 21 years, meaning that they are not allowed to operate a motorvehicle with any alcohol in their system. In contrast, thelegal limit is 0.04% or 40 mg/dL for commercial truck drivers.Different legal limits also apply to airline pilots, bus drivers, andto persons operating recreational watercraft. However, it is importantto recognize that the legal limit does not define a level belowwhich it is safe to operate a vehicle or engage in some otheractivity rather, the legal limit is intended to define a level at orabove which an individual is subject to legal action under a specificset of circumstances. Therefore, decisions about the appropriate levelof alcohol consumption in a particular situation should begin with acareful assessment of whether it’s appropriate to be drinking atall. See More ... FAARegulations forPilots Under14 CFR 61.15, all pilots arerequired to submit a notification letter to AMC-700, within 60 calendardays ofthe effective date of an alcohol-related conviction or administrativeaction.For purposes of 14 CFR 61.15(c), alcohol-related convictions oradministrativeactions are referred to as motor vehicle actions (MVA). An administrative action consistsof a suspension, cancellation, or revocation of a driver license.Examples ofadministrative actions include a suspension, cancellation, orrevocation of adriver license for driving with an excessive blood alcohol level orrefusal tosubmit to a chemical or blood test. Airmen should be aware that thenature andduration of administrative actions varies among the states. Forinstance, somestates, such as North Carolina, provide for a 10-day civil revocationforrefusing to test. Other states may impose a lengthy suspension (e.g. 90- 180days) for a similar violation. See More ... What is the Mission of the ImpairedDriving Division? Themission of the Impaired Driving Division is to develop partnershipsto cooperatively save lives, prevent injuries, and reducetraffic-related health care and economic costs resulting from impaireddriving (alcohol and other drugs). See More ... ==================================================================== Before someonequestions any attorney listed at any site, understand ... If one does a couple of things at this site, they'll bewell informed. UnderlinedText is a DUI-Help.com Link for more information . 1. Takethe SelfEvaluation DUI DWI Defense Quiz ; 2. Submitto the ConfidentialFree Consultation Questionnaire ,and; 3.Interview with at least three DUI DWI Defense DirectoryLawyers before you miss deadlines. 4. Email them all you want! Listen: Even the nicestpeople can find themselves in a DUI situation. The serious consequencesdo not discriminate among any type of individual background. This is atime when you need to have forthright guidance and receive aggressiverepresentation. We are most aware of this and provide as much help andsupport as soon as possible after arrest. Our site is very easy to use. Besides all theinformation ( left frame )available for you to peruse, you may also contact the DUI DWI defenseexperts immediately here. Unlike other lawyer directories, allthe information you would need is included in this site. Simply post an email oruse the CallBack system tophone one of our DWI experts in your state or province .Please take a moment to review the information in addition toresearching a DUI expert attorney. Even with an attorney it is stillvitally important that you familiarize yourself with the issues in yourcase before you shop for an attorney. =================== Everyone is entitled to thepresumption of innocence. Without this guarantee, our system is a totalmockery of justice. You are entitled to compassionate and truthfulguidance through the obstacles you face and the possibilities ofovercoming them. You need an attorney who will fight for your rightsand provide you with the emotional support you need. You can count onthis type of legal representation should you choose to accept one of us. What should you get out of your attorney clientrelationship with one of the experts? Hopefully, you keep a legitimatedriver's license and stay out of jail - i.e. you'll not be convicted ofa drunk driving related charge. We give you the legal help you needright now. Take advantage of our no obligation consultations and emailquestionnaires. Use DUI-Help.com for free consultation(s) and review ofyour DUI / DWI / OUI / OWI arrest or lawsuit. Find OutMore - Many More Links in the Left Frame ~ NewAttorney Listings - Begin Here Alllawyers, attorneys andlaw firms listed are responsible for their advertising. Before hiringany professional, please check them out with your local State BarAssociation or Better Business Bureau. DUI-Help.com is solely adirectory similar to any telephone book. We have no control of theprofessional's administration of legal duties in your case. 1996-2006© DUI-Help.com. All rights reserved. Alexa Report DRUNK DRIVING DWAI DUI DWI ARRESTSIN ALLCOUNTIES AND CITIES OF NEW YORK Airmont Village Akron Village Albany Albion Village Alden Village Alfred Village Amityville Village Amsterdam Ardsley Village Attica Village Auburn Avon Village Babylon Village Baldwinsville Village Ballston Spa Village Batavia Bath Village Bayville Village Beacon Binghamton Blasdell Village Briarcliff Manor Village Brightwaters Village Brockport Village Bronxville Village Buffalo Canandaigua Canastota Village Canton Village Carthage Village Catskill Village Cayuga Heights Village Cazenovia Village Cedarhurst Village Chester Village Chestnut Ridge Village Chittenango Village Cobleskill Village Cohoes Colonie Village Corning Cornwall on Hudson Village Cortland Coxsackie Village Croton-on-Hudson Village Dannemora Village Dansville Village Delhi Village Depew Village Dobbs Ferry Village Dunkirk East Aurora Village East Hills Village East Rochester Village East Rockaway Village East Syracuse Village East Williston Village Ellenville Village Elmira Elmira Heights Village Elmsford Village Endicott Village Fairport Village Falconer Village Farmingdale Village Fayetteville Village Floral Park Village Florida Village Flower Hill Village Fort Edward Village Frankfort Village Fredonia Village Freeport Village Fulton Garden Village Geneseo Village Geneva Glen Cove Glens Falls Gloversville Goshen Village Gouverneur Village Gowanda Village Granville Village Great Neck Estates Village Great Neck Plaza Village Great Neck Village Greenwood Lake Village Hamburg Village Hamilton Village Harrison Village Hastings-on-Hudson Village Haverstraw Village Hempstead Village Herkimer Village Highland Falls Village Hilton Village Homer Village Honeoye Falls Village Hoosick Falls Village Hornell Horseheads Village Hudson Hudson Falls Village Ilion Village Irvington Village Island Park Village Islandia Village Ithaca Jamestown Johnson Village Johnstown Kaser Village Kenmore Village Kings Point Village Kingston Kiryas Joel Village Lackawanna Lake Grove Village Lake Placid Village Lake Success Village Lakewood Village Lancaster Village Lansing Village Larchmont Village Lawrence Village Le Roy Village Lewiston Village Liberty Village Lindenhurst Village Little Falls Liverpool Village Lloyd Harbor Village Lockport Long Beach Lowville Village Lynbrook Village Lyons Village Malone Village Malverne Village Mamaroneck Village Manlius Village Manorhaven Village Massapequa Park Village Massena Village Maybrook Village Mechanicville Medina Village Menands Village Middletown Mineola Village Minoa Village Mohawk Village Monroe Village Montebello Village Montgomery Village Monticello Village Mount Kisco Village Mount Morris Village Mount Vernon Munsey Park Village Muttontown Village New Hempstead Village New Hyde Park Village New Paltz Village New Rochelle New Square Village New York New York Mills Village Newark Village Newburgh Niagara Falls North Hills Village North Syracuse Village North Tonawanda Northport Village Norwich Nyack Village Ogdensburg Old Westbury Village Olean Oneida Oneonta Orchard Park Village Ossining Village Oswego Owego Village Palmyra Village Patchogue Village Peekskill Pelham Manor Village Pelham Village Penn Yan Village Perry Village Piermont Village Plattsburgh Pleasantville Village Pomona Village Port Chester Village Port Jefferson Village Port Jervis Port Washington North Village Potsdam Village Poughkeepsie Ravena Village Rensselaer Rhinebeck Village Rochester Rockville Centre Village Rome Roslyn Village Rye Rye Brook Village Salamanca Sands Point Village Saranac Lake Village Saratoga Springs Saugerties Village Scarsdale Village Schenectady Scotia Village Sea Cliff Village Seneca Falls Village Sherrill Sidney Village Silver Creek Village Skaneateles Village Sleepy Hollow Village Sloan Village Sloatsburg Village Solvay Village South Glens Falls Village South Nyack Village Southampton Village Spencerport Village Spring Valley Village Springville Village Suffern Village Syracuse Tarrytown Village Thomaston Village Tonawanda Troy Tuckahoe Village Tupper Lake Village Utica Valley Stream Village Voorheesville Village Walden Village Walton Village Wappingers Falls Village Warsaw Village Warwick Village Washingtonville Village Waterloo Village Watertown Watervliet Waverly Village Webster Village Wesley Hills Village West Haverstraw Village Westbury Village Westfield Village White Plains Whitehall Village Whitesboro Village Williamsville Village Williston Park Village Yonkers Yorkville Village at the National Safety Council Drug ImpairedDriving How Good Drivers Get Killed , a special report fromReader's Digest Get Your Own Breathalyzer! _ Just One Night toorder video We hope you never get arrested for drinkingand driving. Read on ... OurAmazonBookstore will let you find thebest defense for your case if you don't have an attorney, buy theirbooks! BOOKSTORE Translatethis Site! Chinese French German Italian Korean Japanese Portuguese Spanish and others just cut & paste www.DUI-Help.com DUI-Help.combecomes 1st niche drunk driving defense website on the internet. Firsttooffer free consultations by email, call back, or CGI form. DUI-Help.comout performs LegalMatch, Findlaw, LawInfo and all others in drunkdriving defenseassistance to the public. HAVE LAWYER CALL YOU A.C.L.U.Police Bust Card available Policeabuse is a serious national problem -- and one that especially affectsyoung people and people of color. While many police officers do striveto be courteous, and while we all understand the stress and dangerinvolved in policing, each of us has the right to be treated withrespect -- and without abuse -- by the police ... FULL ACLUPAGE - Download Card IsYour Mugshot on the Web ? Do You Need a Degreein Drinking Alcohol ?