When a new client comes to see me, I inevitably tell them that DUI cases are complicated and that literally there are hundreds of potential issues. Many issues have never been litigated in the Virginia Appellate Courts but are viable issues that an attorney should never overlook in a DUI case. In this blog post I am going to cite examples from appellate courts from other states. It is my hope that by reading this you can honestly tell those facing a DUI that there are hundreds of potential issues in a DUI case, and that they should not give up hope of achieving an acquittal. Here we go!
“Roadblock that leaves unfettered discretion to officers in field is unconstitutional.”
“Blood test excluded based on failure to comply with statutory requirements.”
“HGN (eye test) administered in front seat of police cruiser was not in substantial compliance with National Traffic Safety Administration standards and was properly excluded.”
“Per Se Statute is void for vagueness.”
“Prior convictions not admissible where statute under which prior conviction was obtained was invalid.”
Testimony from criminalist who did not perform the actual blood test violated Crawford.”
“State law for predicate to introduce breath test does not apply in Federal Court.”
“Application of alcohol prior to blood draw results in exclusion of test.”
“Certificate of blood sample without testimony of person who drew blood violates Crawford.”
“Policy of stopping all cars that turned away from a checkpoint unconstitutional.”
“Federal Court rules HGN and PBT are scientific and, absent sufficient evidence of reliability, it is inadmissible.”
“ “Almost” hitting a patrol car while backing up cannot support reasonable suspicion for stop.”
“Defendant has right to cross-examine state’s expert on reliability of Intoxylizer 5000 notwithstanding it has been approved by the state.”
“Defendant must allege breath test is unreliable prior to allegation that Department of Forensic Science deviated from rules in testing machine for accuracy.”
“Odor of alcohol, red eyes, lateness of the hour and admission of drinking two beers cannot justify detention for field sobriety tests.”
“Prosecutorial improper and inflammatory closing argument results in a new trial.”
“Nonconforming blood test not admissible where regulation requiring anticoagulant and enzyme poison were not complied with.”
“Evidence insufficient to support conviction for DUI where evidence did not preclude possibility that defendant had consumed alcohol after driving.”
“No reasonable suspicion to stop vehicle that weaved outside his lane three times over several hundred yards.”
“Prior uncounseled conviction cannot be used for enhancement of subsequent charge where defendant ordered to counseling in lieu of jail.”
“Defense should have been given necessity jury instruction.” (I have a necessity defense in a an upcoming jury trial in Newport News)
“Tip from identifiable caller did not give officer probable cause to search where only innocent details of tip verified.”
“Due to lack of reasonable suspicion by officer, it is error to order defendant out of car to conduct voluntary field sobriety tests.”
“Defendant should have been allowed to cross-examine officer with portions of NHTSA manual.”
These are just a few of the highlights from cases around the country. At our law office we strive to keep up with not only Virginia DUI cases but cases around the country to provide the best defense possible for our clients. Thank you for your continued trust in our office. Have a great and safe Halloween.
Michael C. Tillotson, Esq.
As you can see there are many potential issues involving a DUI/DWI case. It is in your best interest to acquire legal assistance from an attorney who is dedicated and educated on DUI/DWI defense. You can receive a FREE consultation with Mike if you have been arrested of DUI/DWI in Virginia by contacting our office today.
Michael C. Tillotson – DUI Defense Attorney in Virginia. Office 757.969.5197 http://www.VaDUILawyer.com or email at info@vaduilawyer.org
