Articles Posted in DUI

Every now and then the police will set up DUI checkpoints or roadblocks late at night on the weekends. At these roadblocks, the police will stop a vehicle at certain specified intervals (for instance, every 5th vehicle) and check for a driver’s license, insurance and possible impairment from alcohol or drugs. These DUI checkpoints are often set up in areas where people are driving from bars or clubs. Years ago, criminal defense lawyers challenged whether these DUI roadblocks are Constitutional as they are impositions on a person’s freedom without any prior indication that the person is committing a crime or breaking a traffic law. The courts have found that DUI roadblocks are legal but only if they follow certain specific rules and minimize the restraint on a driver’s freedom. One reason for the strict rules for DUI checkpoints is to take a lot of the discretion away from the police officers. The courts want to avoid a situation where the police officers have discretion to do whatever they want at a DUI checkpoint.

In a DUI case south of Jacksonville, Florida the defendant was arrested for DUI after she was stopped at a DUI checkpoint. The criminal defense lawyer filed a motion to suppress the stop of the defendant, and the evidence of the DUI obtained after the stop, because the DUI roadblock was not conducted according to the strict requirements. Before every DUI checkpoint is set up, the police must prepare a set of written guidelines that will be followed during the DUI roadblock to make sure neutral criteria will be used for stopping the vehicles. In this case, the guidelines were submitted, but they indicated that the police were going to stop every third vehicle unless changed by the supervisor. This is not a legal DUI roadblock. The whole idea is to avoid the use of discretion by the police officers to stop whichever cars they want. If the supervisor can change the rate of stopping vehicles without giving a reason, it gives the police too much discretion. Additionally, the police did not follow the regulations because the DUI roadblock ended at a different time than previously indicated and they began stopping every vehicle after a few hours.

Because the police did not submit proper DUI checkpoint guidelines and did not even follow the ones they did submit, the DUI checkpoint was not legal and the defendant’s DUI case was thrown out.

In Florida, DUI arrests are most commonly made by police when they observe someone driving erratically or violating a traffic law, initiate a traffic stop and observe signs that the driver is impaired from alcohol or drugs. However, many DUI arrests result from situations where the police officer never sees the person driving at all. A person commits a DUI when he/she operates a motor vehicle while his/her normal faculties are impaired from alcohol or drugs. A DUI can also be committed when a person is in actual physical control of a vehicle while impaired. Actual physical control can mean many things, but it generally means that the person has the ability to operate the vehicle, even if he/she is not doing so when encountered by the police officer. A defense to being in actual, physical control of the vehicle, and the DUI charge itself, is that the vehicle was not capable of being operated. As an obvious example, if the police officer approached a person drunk in the front seat of a vehicle but the engine had been removed and was being worked on in the garage, the vehicle would not be operable and a DUI charge would not be appropriate.

Cases that are less clear involve the police coming upon a person who is having some sort of car trouble on the road. In a DUI case near Jacksonville, Florida, the police officer approached the defendant’s vehicle that was stopped on the street due to a flat tire. The officer ultimately arrested the defendant for DUI. The defendant’s criminal defense lawyer defended the case by arguing that the vehicle was inoperable due to the flat tire. The defendant lost the DUI case because he apparently admitted to the police officer that he was driving the vehicle up to the point of the flat tire and after he was drinking at the bar.

This was a situation where the defendant talked himself into a DUI conviction. Because the defendant’s statements indicated that the vehicle was operable just prior to the blown tire, the conviction for DUI was upheld.

In Florida, many people assume they are only at risk for getting a driving under the influence of alcohol charge (DUI) when they are caught driving an automobile by the police while impaired. However, there are other ways to get a DUI in Florida. One kind of DUI case that is not uncommon is when a person is just sitting in the driver’s seat of a parked car with the keys in the vehicle while impaired. There have even been DUI charges for people riding lawnmowers or bicycles.

In a recent case south of Jacksonville, Florida, the defendant was stopped by police for riding a bicycle while apparently impaired from alcohol. The police officer went through his normal DUI investigation and ultimately made the DUI arrest. Under Florida law, a person can be convicted of DUI if he/she operates a “vehicle” while impaired from alcohol or drugs. Florida law includes a bicycle within the definition of “vehicle” under the DUI laws. These cases are rare, but when someone is convicted of DUI on a bicycle, the penalties are the same as they are for automobile DUI’s. That includes a mandatory driver’s license suspension although you obviously do not need a driver’s license to operate a bicycle.

When a person is driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs to the extent that his/her normal faculties are impaired and gets into an accident, the DUI charge becomes much more serious. If another person is seriously injured in the accident, the driver will likely be charged with DUI with serious bodily injury which is a felony. If a person dies as a result of the accident, the driver will likely be charged with DUI manslaughter which is a first degree felony in Florida and often comes with a significant prison sentence if the defendant is convicted of the crime.

However, proving a DUI manslaughter case in Florida is not as simple as proving there was an accident, someone died in the accident and one of the drivers was drunk. The state must prove that the defendant’s impairment caused or contributed to the accident and the death. In other words, if the accident would likely have occurred even if the driver was completely sober and/or the accident was not the defendant’s fault, then the state cannot prove a DUI manslaughter case.

In a recent DUI manslaughter case near Jacksonville, Florida, the accident reconstructionist experts who looked at the crash determined that the victim must have been doing a wheelie on his motorcycle when he was hit by the defendant who had been drinking. The victim was driving his motorcycle at about 85 miles per hour and was not wearing a helmet. Because the accident happened, if the victim was doing a wheelie prior to the crash and driving at that speed, there is a good chance the the defendant would not have even seen the motorcycle because its headlight would have been pointed upwards and difficult for oncoming traffic to see. Basically, because the way the accident likely happened, the state could not prove that the defendant was at fault in the accident nor could the state prove that the defendant’s impairment caused or contributed to the crash. As a result, in this case, even though there was a crash, someone died and the defendant was impaired from alcohol, the charge of DUI manslaughter was thrown out because the impairment did not cause or contribute to the crash. The victim’s own reckless driving apparently caused this crash, and the defendant is not criminally liable for it.

In a DUI (driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs) case in Florida, the state must prove that the defendant was driving the vehicle or at least in actual, physical control of the vehicle while impaired. In most cases, this is easy as most DUI cases start when the police officer pulls the driver over for a traffic infraction. In accident cases, it can be more difficult for the state even when it seems obvious the defendant was driving. For instance, when a police officer responds to the scene of an accident, he/she usually has no evidence to suggest alcohol or drugs were involved. The police officer will initiate a traffic crash investigation and get a statement from the presumed driver. During the traffic crash investigation, nothing the driver says about driving or impairment or anything else incriminating can be used against the driver if the police officer ultimately arrests the driver for DUI or another crime. This is called the accident report privilege.

Additionally, if the police officer responds to an accident and the driver is already out of the vehicle, the state may not be able to prove the driver was in fact driving while impaired from alcohol or drugs. In a recent DUI case near Jacksonville, Florida, the police officer responded to a one vehicle crash, and there were four people standing around the vehicle. Ultimately, the driver admitted he was driving, but none of the other people confirmed it and there was no other evidence to establish that he was driving. The police officer arrested him for DUI, but the case was thrown out.

In criminal cases in Florida, a person’s confession alone is not sufficient to convict a person of a crime. In this case, the only evidence the state had that the defendant was driving was his own admission. Without any other independent evidence to corroborate that statement, the statement was not admissible to establish the defendant was driving. As a result, there was insufficient admissible evidence to prove the DUI, and the case was dropped.

In Florida, the police have a right to expect a person to submit to a breath alcohol test, or breathalyzer test, when they make a valid arrest for DUI. The law of informed consent means that a person agrees that he/she will submit to a breathalyzer test after a valid DUI arrest. Of course, the police will not force a person to submit to a breathalyzer test, and a person can refuse to take the breathalyzer test, but theoretically, a person legitimately arrested for DUI is supposed to take the breathalyzer test.

On the other hand, a breathalyzer test after a valid DUI arrest may be thrown out of court if the police officer uses misinformation, incorrect statements of the law or false promises to get the person to submit to a breathalyzer test. In Florida, not everyone understands how the breathalyzer test is done in the context of a DUI investigation and arrest. The police do not use the breathalyzer test as a factor to determine whether they will arrest you for DUI. They only administer the breathalyzer test after they have arrested you and taken you to the jail. If the breathalyzer test is favorable to the defendant, they do not “unarrest” you at that point and let you go home. It is just one factor in the DUI prosecution to follow. If the breathalyzer test is high, they use that against you to prove you were drunk. If the breathalyzer test is low, they downplay it and try to use other evidence to prove you were drunk. Because the breathalyzer test is done after the DUI arrest and after the person is taken to jail, many people refuse to take the breathalyzer test, failing to see how it will help them if the police officer has already decided to arrest him/her.

In a recent DUI case near Jacksonville, Florida, the defendant was arrested for DUI and taken to the jail. At the jail, the police officer asked the defendant if he would submit to a breathalyzer test. The defendant asked the police officer if there was anything he could do to get out of jail. The police officer indicated that the defendant could leave the jail if his blood alcohol level got below 0.08, the legal limit. The defendant then took the breathalyzer test.

In Florida, a person can be arrested for DUI if he/she drives a motor vehicle while impaired from alcohol or drugs. A person can also be arrested for DUI if he/she is not driving if the person is in actual physical control of the vehicle. This has been interpreted to mean being in the driver’s seat with the keys in the ignition or with the keys within arm’s reach. Another issue that arises is whether the vehicle can be operated. If a person is in the driver’s seat of a vehicle with the keys but the engine has been removed, obviously the vehicle cannot be operated and a DUI arrest would not stand. However, if a person is in a vehicle with the keys and the vehicle is out of gas, Florida courts have upheld DUI arrests because a person could easily go and get some gas and the vehicle would be readily operable.

In a recent DUI case near Jacksonville, Florida, a defendant was arrested for DUI and testified that he missed a turn and tried to make a u-turn on his motorcycle. While doing so, he drove his motorcycle into a ditch filled with water. His motorcycle shut off, and he tried to remove it from the ditch without success. He walked to a nearby bar to get a friend to help him retrieve the motorcycle. He also testified that while waiting for the friend, he had a few drinks at the bar. After the drinks, the defendant and his friend went to the ditch and were pulling the motorcycle out when a police officer arrived. The police officer decided that the defendant was impaired from alcohol and arrested the defendant for DUI.

The criminal defense lawyer ultimately had the DUI case thrown out. The state could not prove defendant was ever driving or in actual physical control of the motorcycle. Arguably a person could be in actual physical control of a motorcycle if he is pulling it out of a ditch and he has the keys. However, in this case, the motorcycle was inoperable because it was driven into a ditch filled with water. As a result, the motorcycle could not be started and could not be operated.

In Florida, the DUI laws have become more and more severe over the years. The license suspension penalties that go with DUI convictions have also become more severe over the years. If a person gets a fourth DUI conviction, his/her driving privileges will be permanently suspended. This seems to be a fairly straightforward rule- four DUI convictions equals no more driving, ever. However, there can be questions about convictions of similar drinking and driving laws from other states. Not every state has the same DUI laws. In another state, the drunk driving laws may be called something else and they may have different elements and requirements. Alcohol-related conduict may be legal in one state and a criminal violation in another.

In Florida, the law says that a person with four convictions for DUI, or a similar alcohol-related traffic offense in another state, will result in a permanent revocation of driving privileges. As a result, someone could have a conviction from another state of an alcohol related offense that would not rise to the level of a DUI in Florida, but if a Florida court considers it similar enough to Florida’s DUI laws, that will count as a conviction that could lead to a permanent license suspension. .

We have handled a lot of DUI cases in Florida that start when a police officer sees a person asleep in the driver’s seat of a vehicle. This scenario often results in a DUi arrest, although the police often do not follow the rules in making the DUI arrest. First, it should be noted that in Florida, a person can be arrested for DUI even though he/she is not driving. A person commits a DUI in Florida if he/she is driving or if he/she is in actual physical control of the vehicle. Actual physical control of a vehicle under the Florida DUI laws has been interpreted to mean being in the driver’s seat with the keys in the ignition (whether the vehicle is running or not) or being in the driver’s seat with the keys within arm’s reach.

However, when a police officer sees a person sleeping in his/her vehicle, that police officer is limited in how he/she can investigate the driver. The police officer may assume a person who is asleep in the driver’s seat while the car is running is drunk, but there are other explanations for this scenario. The person could be tired, sick or just taking a break with the air conditioning and/or radio on. There is nothing illegal about sleeping in a car off of the road while the vehicle is on. A police officer cannot detain a person based on an assumption that a person is committing a crime. Because sleeping in a vehicle that is running is not a crime and does not necessarily mean the person is drunk, a police officer cannot approach the person and detain him/her without specific evidence that a crime is being committed.

In a recent DUI case near Jacksonville, Florida, a police officer saw the defendant asleep in the driver’s seat of a running vehicle that was parked in a parking spot. The police officer assumed he was drunk but had no specific evidence to support that assumption. The police officer approached the defendant, parked directly behind his vehicle, shined a spotlight on the defendant, and then told him to roll his window down. After the defendant compiled, the police officer said he smelled an odor of alcohol coming from the defendant, saw bloodshot and glassy eyes, heard slurred speech and all of the usual observations police officers make in every DUI case. The police officer then arrested the defendant for DUI.

First, I suppose we should note that in Florida, a person can be arrested and convicted of driving under the influence (DUI) for riding a bicycle while impaired from alcohol or drugs. It would certainly be bad luck to get a criminal conviction for DUI in Florida for drunk driving of a bicycle, but it could potentially happen.

If a person is arrested for DUI while on a bicycle, the DUI trial would present different issues from the regular motor vehicle DUI case. In a DUI case involving a motor vehicle, the police officer is going to ask the driver to submit to a breathalyzer test to try and determine the driver’s blood alcohol content. The implied consent law in Florida provides that when a person agrees to accept the privileges of driving, he/she also agrees to submit to a breathalyzer test after a valid arrest for DUI while driving a motor vehicle. This is what implied consent means. Now, a person can still refuse to blow in the breathalyzer and cannot be forced to submit to a breathalyzer test, however there are certain penalties that come with the breathalyzer refusal because of the implied consent law. One penalty is an increased license suspension if the police officers complied with the DUI laws.

Another penalty is that during the DUI trial, the state can try to use the refusal against the defendant. The state will present evidence that the driver was asked to submit to the breathalyzer test and refused to do so. The state will be permitted to argue that the defendant refused the breathalyzer test because he/she was drunk and knew he/she would fail it. Of course, there are a number of reasons why a person would refuse to submit to a breath test and the criminal defense lawyer has a right to argue them, but the state can make their argument as well.