“No Refusal Weekend” for DWIs in Dallas and Plano

May 30, 2010

Cities around North Central Texas are publicizing their “no refusal” policies this weekend for DWI enforcement in an effort to ramp up law enforcement and discourage impaired driving. Some have issued press releases to the media such as this one. They’re beginning to have these weekends routinely on Memorial Day, the Fourth of July and Labor day.

Although the press release doesn’t spell it out, what they are trying to communicate is that if you refuse to submit to the breath test, they’ll simply go to a magistrate that is on standby to get a warrant signed. That warrant will enable them to draw your blood, hence the “no refusal.”

In Texas, the police must be extremely careful not to coerce a person to voluntarily give a breath specimen. When a person is formally offered a breath test, they are done so through documents called dic-23, 24, and 25. Those documents lay out all the dangers and disadvantages of submitting to a breath test.

An officer cannot coerce or intimidate a person into submitting to a breath test in Texas. If an officer alters, amends, adds, or subtracts warnings (generally be editorializing his opinion in some way) about the warnings or what the resulting action may be — then they flirt with having the breath test thrown out under a line of cases called the Erdman doctrine. The vast majority of officers will read the dic warnings in a scripted fashion because they don’t want the results of the test thrown out.

The press release definitely walks a tight rope. They’re trying to curb drunk driving this weekend (which everyone agrees is a good thing). But, by over-publicizing the “no refusal weekend,” it is quite possible that people arrested for DWI submit to the breath test because they fear the police punish a refusal by jamming a needle into their arms. It is interesting, then, that the press release omits any references to warrants, and merely insinuates that medical personnel will just happen to be around.

Maybe they’re afraid some lawyer might try and put the press release into evidence during a trial down line to show the police are just trying to intimidate everyone into submitting to a breath test?

Jeremy F. Rosenthal, Esq.

(972) 562-7549

*Jeremy Rosenthal is Board Certified in Criminal Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and licensed by the Supreme Court of Texas. Nothing in this article is intended to be legal advice. For specific legal advice, you should directly consult an attorney.

Leave a Comment » | Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Jeremy Rosenthal, Esq.

You Can Still Win a Breath Test Case with a Blood/ Alcohol Concentration over 0.08

April 22, 2010

By Collin County Criminal Defense Lawyer Jeremy Rosenthal

texasdefensefirm.com

(972) 369-0577

You can be acquitted of DWI even if your breath and/or blood score is above a 0.08 and this is why:

Texas Penal Code 49.04 defines Driving While Intoxicated in the following manner, “A person commits an offense if the person is intoxicated while operating a motor vehicle in a public place.” (Emphasis mine)

Texas Penal Code 49.02 (A) and (B) legally define intoxicated as, “not having the normal use of mental or physical faculties by reason of the introduction of alcohol, a controlled substance, a drug, a dangerous drug, a combination of two or more of those substances, or any other substance into the body; or  having an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more.

As you can see, your blood alcohol concentration must be at 0.08 or more while you are operating a motor vehicle… not an hour or two hours after you operated a motor vehicle for the State to convict  you based on that definition.

This brings us to the concept of “retrograde extrapolation.”  While that sounds like a NASA term, retrograde extrapolation is the science behind trying to determine what someone’s blood alcohol concentration was several hours in the past.

Several things factor into retrograde extrapolation.  A person with the proper scientific background (usually the State’s breath test expert) can calculate what someone’s approximate blood alcohol concentration was at the time of driving based on factors such as height, weight, gender, type of alcoholic beverage consumed, and type or quantity of meal and time of the last drink.

It is not uncommon for the witness (typically the State’s breath test expert) to estimate that a person’s blood alcohol concentration was below 0.08 at the time of driving (or that the person’s BAC was actually higher while driving than it was at the time of testing) based on the retrograde extrapolation facts.  Jurors, then, may have a reasonable doubt as to whether the driver had a BAC of 0.08 or more while driving even though their breath test scores are above 0.08.

As a point of caution — retrograde extrapolation is based on scientific principals and Courts have limitations on what jurors will be allowed to considered as scientific testimony.  Only cases where the BAC score is reasonably close to 0.08 may cause the BAC to extrapolate low enough to make a difference.  For instance, it doesn’t help your case if the State’s expert witness says “instead of a 0.14, the subject was possibly at 0.13 at the time of driving.”

Police routinely question people (usually after the breath test) about what they had eaten, when they last ate, when they last drank, etc.  These questions are for the purposes of later retrograde extrapolation.  These questions are testimonial in nature and you have the right to refuse to answer them — which is typically the safer course.

Finally, a jury can simply have a reasonable doubt as to the validity of the breath test score — regardless of what it is.  If the jury has a reasonable doubt that the person on trial is intoxicated (on all the legal definitions of 49.02) — the verdict would be not guilty just the same.

*Jeremy Rosenthal is Board Certified in Criminal Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and licensed by the Supreme Court of Texas. Nothing in this article is intended to be legal advice.  For specific legal advice you should consult an attorney.

3 Comments | DWI, Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Jeremy Rosenthal, Esq.