How can I win my DUI?

It's very possible to win a DUI even if you blew a .08 or higher on the Intoxilyzer 8000. The Intoxilyzer 8000 is often called the "breathalyzer" or "breath test." All Florida law enforcement agencies use the Intxoilyzer 8000 for alcohol breath testing.

The number that anyone blew on a breathalyzer is one of the last factors that should be considered when defending a DUI. The reason why is the test ticket, which contains the reading, is only one piece of evidence that is to be considered by a jury in a DUI case. Contrary to widely held belief, there is absolutely no presumption of guilt from blowing a .08 or higher. A basic fundamental principal of American law is that a Defendant is innocent until proven guilty. Before a jury can convict, all 6 individuals in the jury need to be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the driver had a .08 or higher BAC. There is a huge difference between showing the jury a piece of paper saying .08 and proving to the jury beyond a reasonable doubt how the reading was correct.

In every criminal defense case, there will be police citizen contact. DUI's aren't any exception. So the first area that must be thoroughly examined is what events caused the traffic stop. An officer must have probable cause to conduct a traffic stop. This is either probable cause for a traffic violation or probable cause to suspect a driver of DUI. If the officer did not have sufficient facts to support a traffic stop, all of the State's evidence is suppressed. That means that the evidence is not capable to be presented during a trial. From time to time, an officer will witness sufficient facts to generate a traffic stop for a traffic infraction, but does not have the requisite amount of suspicion to continue the traffic stop for a DUI investigation. The result is the same. Supression of the illegally obtained evidence. If the evidence is suppressed, it makes absolutely no difference what your reading was since the State won't be able to introduce it at trial. An example of this matter was a DUI case that I handled in another State. The driver of the vehicle drove through a marked checkpoint at a high rate of speed without stopping. A police officer chased her down, arrested her for DUI and she blew a .18. That is over twice the legal limit. The Judge dismissed the case ruling that the stop was illegal since the checkpoint had been set up in an illegal manner.

If the traffic stop ends up being proper, you can actually still prevail in a DUI trial. DUI trial work is quite complex and it takes years to learn the intricacies of DUI cases. I follow a three step approach to trying a DUI breath test case if the result is over a .08. First, I examine what my client did right. The State wants the jury to focus on 3 or 4 things that my client did wrong out of 100 or so different possible indicators. So highlighting what my client did right is very important. The second thing that I do is do a detailed analysis of my clients behavior. This includes how my client performed on the road side sobriety exercises, attitude, demeanor etc. The point of this is kind of simple, did my client behave like he or she was drunk. This can be a very powerful way to argue a DUI case because everybody sitting on the jury has seen somebody who has been drunk and knows how drunk people behave. I take all the information that I've gathered and I compare it to what type of behavior and actions ought to be expected by an individual with that kind of blood alcohol content. If a client blew a .27 and can walk a straight line and not slur words, the test is wrong. I point out to the jury that the evidence pointing towards guilt must be consistent. If the reading is high, but the video doesn't show a drunk driver stumbling from the car and slurring speech, then that evidence is inconsistent with the test reading. All benefits of the doubt must remain resolved in favor of the defendant.

While very often it isn't required to put on any evidence at all in a DUI trial, sometimes the problem of guilt or innocence is close. In this instance, I like to recommend highering an expert to attack the scientific validity of the machine. As a science nerd I feel very confident saying that the Intoxilyzer 8000, and other breath testing equipment, misapply basic scientific principals. In addition to the misapplication of scientific principals, the machines rely on a group of assumptions determined by what the psudoscientists consider a "normal person." An exceptionally strong point to make to a jury in these cases is that the United States Constitution doesn't say "assume beyond a reasonable doubt", but rather "proof beyond a reasonable doubt."

Winning a DUI case is often very difficult, but the consequences of losing can be severe. An experienced DUI attorney will be able to answer your specific questions regarding your case.

The Law Offices of Michael A. Dye, P.A. is a DUI defense law firm located in Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida. Mr. Dye welcomes inquiries as to his case results. For more information, please call (954)745-5848 or visit http://AlcoholAndDrugLaw.com.