Abstract
Intoxication is being in a state of alcoholic or narcotic intoxication. The government is increasingly sensitive to the cases of operating a vehicle while intoxicated, explaining that the drunk driver is endangering both for their life, health and property, and other road users. However, as practice shows, the number of the detained drunk drivers increases dramatically around the holidays.
If the circumstances of the crime are clear, and in a short time collected all the necessary evidence, the Prosecutor may apply to the court to hear the case under expedited proceedings. Basically, criminal cases associated with DUI are dealt with in the courts in accelerated proceedings.
Dozens of different factors resulting from the deplorable situation in the economy, led to the fact that DUI has become almost the most serious (in its consequences) the crime of all.
In recent years, in connection with the growing number of vehicle owners, the particular relevance is the activities of courts in the scope of administrative law in the resolution of cases on administrative offenses.
Widespread in the police force indicative appliances (the so-called “tube”) for the establishment of intoxication show the measurement results in specific numbers, they are used mainly in order to determine if the case with alcohol. If an indicative device installed drunk, then the police are already using the calibrated evidentiary device, showing the alcohol content in mg/l. For this reason, as a rule, the driver has to blow in two different breathalyzers, first in indicative device, and then already in evidence, if the evidence is indicative of the device indicate the presence of alcohol. The use of the indicative device is not required if there is evidentiary breathalyzers. In court as evidence is only accepted indicators calibrated evidentiary breathalyzers showing the alcohol content in mg/l. Also have the court force the evidence and the results of blood tests. Drugs tested using rapid tests. The driver of the suspected drugs is delivered for examination to a medical institution, where the presence of narcotic or psychotropic substances or other intoxicating substances is established by studies of biological fluids (blood, urine).
As there is no device similar to a breathalyzer, which could for a few seconds to set intoxication of drugs, the investigation of cases with gathering takes a little more time. Today, to recognize the driver guilty of the actual driving while intoxicated, the Prosecutor must prove that the driver:
1. The concentration of alcohol in the body amounted to at least 0.8 ppm within two hours after the driver got behind the wheel.
2. The focus of TDK in the body was at least 5 nanograms ppm for two hours after the driver got behind the wheel.
Even if there is no blood or breath, is able to confirm the presence of alcohol in the body of the driver, or if the alcohol concentration exceeds the permissible level prescribed by law, the driver may still be found guilty of drunk driving under DUI “Affected By”. To recognize the driver guilty under DUI “Affected By”, the prosecution must prove that the driver:
- Under the influence of alcohol, marijuana or other drugs;
- Under the influence of various drugs and/or alcohol.
In this case, the Prosecutor will rely on the "evidence before the arrest: e.g., assessment of police-state driver at the time of stopping the machine and results of field tests for sobriety. Lawyers strongly suggest refusing from passing field sobriety tests. Many drivers do not realize that they could be found guilty of driving while intoxicated even when the alcohol concentration in the body reaches 0.8 ppm.
The list below shows the possible penalties for driving while intoxicated:
- Prison term;
- A monetary penalty;
- Monetary penalties (in addition to fines);
- Suspension or revocation of a driver's license;
- Probation up to 5 years;
- Compulsory assessment for the presence of alcohol or drug dependence;
- Compulsory treatment for alcohol or drug dependence;
- Meeting with people who suffered from the actions of the drivers who operated the car while intoxicated (Davenport, 2006).
It is not necessary to spare money for a good attorney driving drunk – lawyer will be repaid with interest when you can avoid exorbitant fines that may be set by the court.The punishment for driving under the influence of drugs and alcohol, jail time, fines or deprivation of rights depends on various circumstances: the concentration of alcohol in the blood of the driver, availability of driver conviction for DUI, as well as the individual circumstances of the incident.
In addition to the penalties that may be set by the court, the prosecution of a DUI can lead to other very serious consequences. Not every lawyer will warn about: - a conviction for driving while intoxicated will be entered into driver’s record;- the record will remain there forever;- the insurance premiums will increase;- the cost of the services of a tow truck will increase;- the driver will not be able to obtain licenses of certain professions;- the driver will have difficulties when renting a car.
As you know, severe consequences of conviction in the case of drunk driving are not confined to punishments which are appointed by the court. They will chase for years, which has a devastating impact on your personal life and career.
Necessarily to have a lawyer in cases of driving under the influence to know that the police officer has the legal right to stop drivers for violating traffic rules. If the driver was asked to stop, by law he is obliged to do, and he needs to show police a driver's license, registration and proof of insurance. In addition, the driver must get out of the car, if a police officer asks him to do it. But nothing more he hasn’t to do
The driver is not obliged to answer any questions of the police. He needs to remember that "anything he says can and will be used against him in court." Every question asked by police, is specifically intended to gather evidence of guilt.
Even such seemingly innocent questions as "where are you going?" and "where are you going?", are set with the aim to understand whether the driver consumed alcohol or not. After receiving the answers, the officer may ask to undergo field sobriety tests. And here usually it all goes downhill. So lawyers in cases of DUI strongly advise to refuse from passing field sobriety tests.
If a police officer suspects the driver is drunk driving, he may ask him to undergo field sobriety tests. The results of these tests can give the police reasonable grounds to arrest the driver for driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. The driver can refuse from passing field sobriety tests; even if he are sure that he successfully pass them.
Today, there are three standardized field form of field sobriety tests:
- test horizontal nystagmus;
- test for the ability to go in a straight line, then turn 180 degrees and return back;
- test of balance (standing on one leg).
The driver is not required to undergo field tests for sobriety. These tests are held on a voluntary basis. Any competent lawyer on cases of DUI will advise to refuse from passing field sobriety tests (Shaw, 2015).
Indeed, if a police officer asks the driver to pass field sobriety tests, it means that he already has all the reason to be arrested for drunk driving. He asks the driver to pass field sobriety tests to gather material that will be used in court against him. Being arrested for driving while intoxicated is one thing, but to be convicted is an entirely different. The purpose of field sobriety tests lies in the fact that the Prosecutor had enough evidence of him guilt. If the level of alcohol or TDK in the body exceeds the norm, but the driver failed field sobriety tests (the officer will always say that he failed), he can still prosecute under DUI “Affected by”.
After field tests, the speed police will ask the driver to pass a breathalyzer test. It is important to distinguish between the test of the breathalyzer and breathe analysis that is already being conducted directly at the police station. The breathalyzer test is performed using small portable devices. It is tested on the roadway at the time of stopping the vehicle.
The test results of the breathalyzer can give police probable cause to arrest for drunk driving. The validation results of a breathalyzer are not admissible in court as evidence (according to the so-called "Frye standard").
It is important to distinguish between the test of the breathalyzer and breathe analysis undertaken at the police station. And that's why the breathalyzer test is voluntary, and any experienced lawyer on cases of DUI will advise to abandon it; but the refusal to test for alcohol content in breath, which is taken at the police station, can lead to serious negative consequences. So remember the advice of lawyers in cases of driving while intoxicated: breathalyzer test is formal analysis for the presence of alcohol in the breath at the police station (McGovern, Thomas F. & William L., 2002).
Even though the validation results of a breathalyzer are not admissible in court as evidence of driver’s guilt, an experienced lawyer in cases of drunken driving is still recommends taking advantage of the right not to pass this test. The test results of the breathalyzer can give the police a reason to arrest the driver. But without checking the breathalyzer and field sobriety tests the police may not be sufficient grounds to arrest him for DUI charges. If a driver is still arrested, but there are no test results, his lawyer in cases of driving under the influence of alcohol and drugs are more likely to win his case.
Driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs is a serious crime. Punishment can last for a long time and ruin driver’s life. So for it need a lawyer in cases of drunk driving, who will fight for his interests and achieve the best possible results.
A conviction in the case of drunk driving can ruin friendships, career and family. If driver was arrested for DUI, the best thing he can do is to hire an experienced lawyer on cases of DUI. Take the choice of a lawyer very seriously because it may be the only person, who can help driver get out of this terrible situation.
For three decades the authorities have done much to reduce DUI. Hard to believe, but back in 1983 for driving while intoxicated, the police arrested each of the 80th owner driver-license in the country. However, current statistics are shocking; no less through the fault of drunk drivers still dies at least ten thousand people annually.
The last year may have a record number of DUI. Many cities and counties this indicator is ahead of "normal country" of 45% - 50% (especially in municipalities with high unemployment). Drivers drink because of depression, hopeless financial situation and a banal idleness.
Hundreds of people every day in the detention cell for the presence of empty or open bottles in the cabin, red eyes, shortness of breath or slow speech. All these minor factors are the reasons for the arrest. In addition, handcuffed even motorists with a blood alcohol level in the blood within normal limits (the guards often think that alcohol is simply eroded).
Many researchers have noted that with the onset of the economic crisis “the moral character of the motorists” plummeted and continues to plummet (Shaw, 2015).
References
Davenport, Maria-Teresa (2006). "Deportation and Driving: Felony Dui and Reckless Driving as Crimes of Violence Following Leocal v. Ashcroft". The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 96: 849–875.
McGovern, Thomas F. & William L. (2002). Alcohol Problems in the United States: Twenty Years of Treatment Perspective. Routledge. p. 86.
Shaw, B. (2015, Feb 21). "Nevada DUI Laws". ABC DUI. Shaw Education Developments.
