Published on:

DWI Defedant Say No Probable Cause for Stop

A man stayed for two to three hours and had three Scotch & Sodas at a popular bar in Poughkeepsie, New York. After he left the bar shortly after 3:00 a.m., he was drove his white Chevy pick-up truck going northbound on Route 9 near the Vanderbilt Mansion. A state trooper was on that same road going the same direction and he was right behind the pick-up truck.
The state trooper noticed that the pick-up truck had swerved left and right on the lane two or three times. The wheels crossed the double yellow lines in the middle of the road and the fog line on the right side of the road. A New York Drug Crime Lawyer said the state trooper decided to pull the pick-up truck over.

When the state trooper went over to the driver’s side to ask for the driver’ license and registration, he noticed the driver’s red glassy eyes and the heavy smell of liquor on him. The state trooper then asked the driver to alight from his pick-up truck.

The state trooper asked the man to look at his finger and to follow his finger with his eyes without moving his head. The man could not follow the state trooper’s finger. The state trooper asked the man to walk heel-to-toe and then turn. The man could not keep his balance;, he swayed and could not walk a straight line. He asked the man to stand on one leg but the man could not even raise his leg without swaying and losing his balance. The state trooper then asked him to count to 30 but the man could only count up to 19. The state trooper asked the man to touch the tip of his nose with his index finger but he kept missing it. The state trooper then administered the breath analyzer test and found that the blood alcohol level of the man was three times the legal limit. So he gave the man the Miranda warnings and placed him arrest for driving while intoxicated.

A New Yorkt Drug Possession Lawyer said that at trial, the man wanted the evidence for the People suppressed. The evidence he wanted suppressed consisted of the State Trooper’s testimony, and all the other blood and urine tests taken subsequent to his arrest, including his admission that he had been drinking scotch and soda at a bar before starting to drive. He claims that he was not driving while intoxicated at all. The State Trooper had no probable cause to stop him on the road; and he had no probable cause to administer the sobriety tests to him. He claims that he was not Mirandized prior to being made to take the sobriety tests and so all the evidence acquired after that should not be used in the trial against him.

The man also testified that he had a companion with him in the pick-up truck which the State Trooper did not mention at all. He claims that the State Trooper’s memory of the events and his testimony at trial were all conjectures and fabrications.

The trial court convicted him. He now appeals his convictions.

Contact Information