Field sobriety test

[PUCKER]

"no refusal" just doesn't seem Constitutional to me.

gig - I know what HGN is, but I'm guessing that not every else does, how about a quick primer?

[gigag04]

"no refusal" just doesn't seem Constitutional to me.

gig - I know what HGN is, but I'm guessing that not every else does, how about a quick primer?

...not constitutional...???? It is an evidentiary search warrant supported by a probable cause affidavit sworn to a judge. Seems like the essence of keeping in line with 4A.

HGN stands for Horizotal Gaze Nystagmus, which is an involuntary jerking of the eyes. The SFSTs are valided and endorsed by numerous medical and professional studies.

[pbwalker]

"no refusal" just doesn't seem Constitutional to me.

[Keith B]

"no refusal" just doesn't seem Constitutional to me.

gig - I know what HGN is, but I'm guessing that not every else does, how about a quick primer?

...not constitutional...???? It is an evidentiary search warrant supported by a probable cause affidavit sworn to a judge. Seems like the essence of keeping in line with 4A.

HGN stands for Horizotal Gaze Nystagmus, which is an involuntary jerking of the eyes. The SFSTs are valided and endorsed by numerous medical and professional studies.

The big issue with no refusal is there is a discrepancy in the statutes that states if a subject refuses, then they can't be forced to submit to a BAC of any type unless you were involved in an injury accident. I was on a voir dire that this exact issue was brought up and the statute is pretty clear. In a almost backward scenario in jury selection as a former LEO was that the prosecutor scratched me from his choice and the defense attorney wanted me because I would potentially be able to point out the discrepancy; usually the other way around.

As for forced BAC, my opinion is it can be a double edged sword. In many states there is a statute that says refusal is automatic suspension, so at least here in Texas you have a chance to beat the rap if you are on the edge of being under the legal limit.

[gigag04]

I see what you're saying but in execution it's no different than if you refuse me entry in your home and a judge cuts a search warrant. The warrant is the game changer (if I'm following your post about the discrepancy correctly).

[Keith B]

I see what you're saying but in execution it's no different than if you refuse me entry in your home and a judge cuts a search warrant. The warrant is the game changer (if I'm following your post about the discrepancy correctly).

The conflict is spelled out in TTC 724.12 and .13 under the implied consent statute. .13 states you don't have to submit unless you meet the requirements in .012 which is pretty specific.

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/D ... tm#724.012" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/D ... tm#724.013" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[pbwalker]

There is something about a blanket "warrant" that irks me. I want drunks off the road as much as the next guy, but I am not willing to give up my civil liberties and rights to do so.

What probable cause does a PD / SO have to justify the warrant? Is it because I am driving at a certain time of night? If I turn around, what PC does a LE agency have in pulling me over for doing so?

I'm sorry, but that sounds very "police state" -ish to me.

[Ameer]

A search can be authorized with a warrant but you still have the right to not be forced to incriminate yourself, and a simple reading of the fifth amendment shows it doesn't limit the scope to speech.

[steveincowtown]

I see what you're saying but in execution it's no different than if you refuse me entry in your home and a judge cuts a search warrant. The warrant is the game changer (if I'm following your post about the discrepancy correctly).

No disrespect, but following that logic, you would not have any issues if they do a "no refusal" weekend for searching your house?

No refusal equals a blankets warrant in my mind as well. I agree 100% that if their is evidence of a DUI (dash cam video, a recording of slurred speech, etc.) that a LEO should be able to take this to a Judge as evidence, but to simply say that a reason Judge can issue a warrant simply because I was pulled over is no good in my book. If I get pulled over, I most certainly have the right to remain silent and not incriminate myself.

[pbwalker]

No disrespect, but following that logic, you would not have any issues if they do a "no refusal" weekend for searching your house?

Exactly! How long before a judge grants a blanket warrant for "no refusal" entry in to your home? After all, you *may* have some Marijuana in there...

Papers please...

[gigag04]

I see what you're saying but in execution it's no different than if you refuse me entry in your home and a judge cuts a search warrant. The warrant is the game changer (if I'm following your post about the discrepancy correctly).

No disrespect, but following that logic, you would not have any issues if they do a "no refusal" weekend for searching your house?

No refusal equals a blankets warrant in my mind as well. I agree 100% that if their is evidence of a DUI (dash cam video, a recording of slurred speech, etc.) that a LEO should be able to take this to a Judge as evidence, but to simply say that a reason Judge can issue a warrant simply because I was pulled over is no good in my book. If I get pulled over, I most certainly have the right to remain silent and not incriminate myself.

Wrong...as I first said...the warrant must be supported with probable cause...just like any other evidentiary warrant. No refusal weekend means a judge is on call and ready, and you don't have to call through the list and wake up different ones to figure out who is in town and willing to read an affidavit at 4 am. No disrespect taken though, the question was valid. Probable cause is a much higher standard than "he was pulled over." In training newer officers in the warrant procedure, they have had their affidavits kicked back because the judge wanted more info.

Exactly! How long before a judge grants a blanket warrant for "no refusal" entry in to your home? After all, you *may* have some Marijuana in there...

Papers please...

Your general distrust for anything that LEOs do is extremely obvious in many of your posts that I read. In one post you even went after medics...

Because of this, I find it hard to motivate myself to respond to your posts. I feel like much of what I share is first hand experiential knowledge, and your comments above indicate more of a "falling sky" response, possibly based out of fear. Distrust for the government is one thing, I see that frequently, but unless I am reading many of your posts wrong, you take issue with all civil servants.

Back on topic, I feel like there is a general misunderstanding on meeting the standard of probable cause.

[pbwalker]

Exactly! How long before a judge grants a blanket warrant for "no refusal" entry in to your home? After all, you *may* have some Marijuana in there...

Papers please...

Your general distrust for anything that LEOs do is extremely obvious in many of your posts that I read. In one post you even went after medics...

Because of this, I find it hard to motivate myself to respond to your posts. I feel like much of what I share is first hand experiential knowledge, and your comments above indicate more of a "falling sky" response, possibly based out of fear. Distrust for the government is one thing, I see that frequently, but unless I am reading many of your posts wrong, you take issue with all civil servants.

Back on topic, I feel like there is a general misunderstanding on meeting the standard of probable cause.

Went after medics? Really...Let's be sure to cite sources: viewtopic.php?f=108&t=40929&p=492007&hi ... le#p492007" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Now tell me...how did I "go after" medics? I'd LOVE to hear your explanation...Are you saying it is ok to do what he does? I find it hard to see any civility in that "civil servants" handling of these situations. Maybe you do...

You make a lot of assumptions with your post. I have a great respect for LEO's and the fact that they put themselves in danger each and every day. You seem to take offense at each and every post that calls out a LEO for anything. As though they can do no wrong. I understand the blue shield and all that...but like I've said, I don't agree with the over-extension of LE agencies and the bending of rights for our "safety". If this is "falling sky", fine.

Do tell us how we misunderstand PC...

http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/we ... le%20cause

(n) probable cause ((law) evidence sufficient to warrant an arrest or search and seizure) "a magistrate determined that there was probable cause to search the house"

What evidence do you have to setup a 'no refusal' checkpoint? I am genuinely asking this question...what evidence do you have?

[gigag04]

What evidence do you have to setup a 'no refusal' checkpoint? I am genuinely asking this question...what evidence do you have?

I have no experience with a checkpoint...AFAIK they are still nailing down the case law and legislation regarding checkpoints. Our search warrants all stem from standard DWI arrests. My standard affidavit will include my reason for the stop, what I observed during the stop, and what factors indicated that defendant was intoxicated.

These can include:
Odor of an alcoholic beverage
Red, glassy eyes
Slow, labored speech
Fumbling while retrieving DL/Insurance
Observance of standardized clues on SFSTs
Criminal History regarding DWIs
Statements made by the defendant
Condition of clothing
Presence of bracelets or markings on hands/wrists from bars
Indicators of impaired driving
(and many others)

Here is a link to a publicly available search warrant for blood packet (found via google):
http://www.cityofriesel.com/DWIbloodwarrantbyhand.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

These forms are in line with what much of the state is using.

In reference to our earlier deviation from topic (my fault), I'm not offended by your posts, and am happy to hear other opinions. However, often times I feel like subjects in the media are thrown under the bus with little to no facts by people with no first hand experience in doing their job. I have nothing against you whatsoever. I don't feel that a search warrant for blood is a bending of rights. DWI is a serious crime that costs lives every year. The laws passed by the legislature (3 strikes rule, accident rule) are there to protect the general public from intoxicated drivers and the dangers they present.

I am a champion of citizens rights, and respect them in every execution of my job, as do the vast majority of my peers - even when they are publicly accused of the contrary.

[Oldgringo]

So!

All of those signs and instructions urging us not to 'drink and drive' mean, "Don't drink and Drive", if you don't have lots of money.

[pbwalker]

What evidence do you have to setup a 'no refusal' checkpoint? I am genuinely asking this question...what evidence do you have?

I have no experience with a checkpoint...AFAIK they are still nailing down the case law and legislation regarding checkpoints. Our search warrants all stem from standard DWI arrests. My standard affidavit will include my reason for the stop, what I observed during the stop, and what factors indicated that defendant was intoxicated.

These can include:
Odor of an alcoholic beverage
Red, glassy eyes
Slow, labored speech
Fumbling while retrieving DL/Insurance
Observance of standardized clues on SFSTs
Criminal History regarding DWIs
Statements made by the defendant
Condition of clothing
Presence of bracelets or markings on hands/wrists from bars
Indicators of impaired driving
(and many others)

Here is a link to a publicly available search warrant for blood packet (found via google):
http://www.cityofriesel.com/DWIbloodwarrantbyhand.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

These forms are in line with what much of the state is using.

In reference to our earlier deviation from topic (my fault), I'm not offended by your posts, and am happy to hear other opinions. However, often times I feel like subjects in the media are thrown under the bus with little to no facts by people with no first hand experience in doing their job. I have nothing against you whatsoever. I don't feel that a search warrant for blood is a bending of rights. DWI is a serious crime that costs lives every year. The laws passed by the legislature (3 strikes rule, accident rule) are there to protect the general public from intoxicated drivers and the dangers they present.

I am a champion of citizens rights, and respect them in every execution of my job, as do the vast majority of my peers - even when they are publicly accused of the contrary.

Thank you for the reply. I think we both agree on a lot of these subjects, it's just that the written word can not always convey emotion. I apologize if I came across as anti-LEO. I know that LEO's work a thankless job and I appreciate it every day...

Your list above is what I'd expect to see for PC and I agree 100%. If I were a LEO, any one of those alone would be PC enough for me (but that's just my opinion...I am not sure if there are other factors that need to exist for PC).

My big pain point is not DWI stops. Heck, I wish EVERYONE under the influence (be it booze, xanax, grass, etc.) would go to jail for a mandatory minimum. If you drive while intoxicated, you are not only putting yourself at risk (the least of my concerns) but you are putting me, my wife, and my two little girls at risk.

My "beef" is around the roadblocks. If I go out to a movie with my family and drive up to one of these spots, where does that PC exist? In my mind, it doesn't. And it's my opinion that the police do these knowing that a large majority will comply, while those who do not are generally going to be intoxicated. It's the sheeple that comply that bother me. They are giving up their 4th. There is no PC to be stopped, and the fact that you are arrested on spot for not blowing in to the device bothers me (this is in SAT...not sure of the regs for other cities). Then, they go and get a warrant for your blood. So what rights do I have as an ordinary citizen when I roll up in to one of these? It's a trap. If you turn around, you are going to be lit up. If you drive up and refuse, you go to jail. I really don't drink and I surely do not get behind the wheel when I've even had one sip, so if I drive up to one of these, I know I am not going to get in trouble...but it's the principal. I shouldn't have to be dealing with it to begin with. (I know you have no experience with the checkpoints, so this is more of a rant...) It's essentially the same thing as a LEO walking up to your house and saying "Let me in!" and if you don't, you are arrested...only then the judge signs a warrant.