Since you were NOT driving a motor vehicle, "implied consent" doesn't kick in . . . you were under NO legal obligation to submit to any sort of sobriety test or breathalyzer.atxgun wrote: . . . I guess they didn't really suspect me of being intoxicated after all as I was given no sobriety test or breathalyzer.
I absolutely agree that once an LEO utters the magic words "You're Under Arrest" one should comply and shut up . . . fight in court, not on the street. But it doesn't sound like the guy was arrested, just cuffed . . . for taking a walk. This sounds to me a lot like assault.seamusTX wrote:Sorry, flb_78, but resisting arrest usually gets you tazed or "lit up" these days.
So the question is . . . is resisting handcuffing a crime when one is NOT under arrest? Can it be argued that handcuffing an individual who is NOT under arrest and has committed no crime is excessive force? Is there any established case law on this?
At the very least, filing a formal complaint against the officer(s) involved is called for . . . maybe even paying a lawyer a couple of hundred bucks to write it on your behalf. It may not provide any relief to you now, but eventually an officer with an attitude problem like this WILL cross the line in a serious way . . . and then complaint letters of excessive/improper force, failure to follow proper procedures, etc., WILL come back to haunt him . . . and he'll get what's coming to him through the legal system.