I believe the term is "reasonable cause / suspicion" as in: Oh........... so you say you've had a drink today? How Many? When?......................off you go to jail

Here's a trick often used. Officer asks you to step out of car and come to rear of car while he goes to his car to call in your license. You stand there waiting. And waiting. And waiting. So you innocently lean on the trunk of your car. That now becomes "He was so intoxicated that he had to lean on his car for support." And it's all on the dash cam

Or how about the trick where they tell you you're free to go and then, ask if you mind if they have a look your car? That way, you can't claim you felt under duress because you were already told you're free to go. Don't ever help the state. They are only trying to arrest you.

So when a cop asks you a question you don't want to answer do you just ignore the question, reply "no comment" or "i don't want to answer that" or some other reply. I know it is not smart to admit to anything and it can worse to lie.

What is the appropriate reply the question "have you been drinking?" or "do you know how fast you were going?" I take the 5th does not sound like the best answer.

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/unseSFWjuqs?feature=player_detailpage" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Just a bit of humor for the thread.

I wouldn't answer any question other than "Is this address on your license current?" Assuming he tells you immediately why he pulled you over, any question related to that is an attempt to get you to confess. Any question unrelated to that is a fishing expedition. You can't help yourself by helping him with either.

If he pulled me over for speeding, any question unrelated to that I'd answer with, "What does that have to do with the reason for this stop?" or "Officer, everything you need to know is on the documents I just handed you. Am I free to go or are you detaining me?"

Never give a yes or no. Ask him the questions. Let him know you're not going to talk your way into a search or an arrest. If you can't think of anything else, just say, "I don't have to answer any questions and am not going to. Am I free to go or are you detaining me?"

Does it matter at that point?

If the officer wants to unjustly envoke probable cause he can easily do it with out much issue right.

"as soon as I pulled him over I could hear him slur his speach"

Even if its not true, and the guy then blows a .18, even saul from breaking bad couldent make a case for you

So the drill would be ..

Refuse the FST
Say NOTHING
If they elect to arrest at that point .... demand an attourney before allowing a blow or blood draw?

I doubt you can delay the blood draw or blow test for an atty. to arrive. Implied consent means you consented when you got your license. Drag it out and delay and they'll hit you with refusal.

I guess my question is really for Jim,

My impression is that you always refuse the FST since it is a subjective test that essentially gives probable cause for the blow?

If you refuse the FST then LEO has to make an arrest or release decision based on his personal assessment of your condition?

Once arrest decision has been made, it is going to go south but if you refused the FST your lawyer can put up a good no PC argument?

It seems to me the weakest link for LEO's is determining probable cause for pulling you over in the first place. Unless there's evidence such as a dash cam, broken taillight (defective equipment) or some other miniscule violation, couldn't it be argued that pulling you over was without probable cause?

Also, I'm wondering why not silently hand over the documents, including your lawyer's business card THEN ask if you are free to go?

Obviously, you're not free to go while cop has your docs. When I went through the process, because that state had a reputation for racial profiling, the cops wrote thorough notes on their PC for pulling me over. It was a road known for speed enforcement and with a state police precinct on the road. My speedometer lamp had just gone out and I couldn't see my speed. I was going 63 in a 50 zone, not at all in a hurry, but was the only car on the road and so had no pace car to follow. Their PC for the stop had me dead to rights.

If you were to get a lawyer to try to fight it out in court, I'd definitely go after PC for the stop. For example, in AZ a speed limit is invalid if there hasn't been a road study done for that road, at which point "reasonable and prudent below 65mph" becomes the law. Lots of roads here have not had road studies, so that's a good way to challenge PC for a stop based on speeding that leads to bigger things.

If you're really interested in how field sobriety is conducted,
Google NHTSA field sobriety manual. It is the training manual for LEOs. Available free in pdf format....about 200 pages.

I prefer to not try to beat the experts at their game. I choose not to play.

The manual is very informative. For example of the tWo accepted field sobriety tests, one leg stand and walk and turn, they are generally inappropriate for persons over age 65 or persons 50 pounds or more overweight. what I think the general public doesn't realize is the steps an officer goes through before even making the stop.

Anway, my general advice is

DONT DRINK AND DRIVE

Take a cab

Have your license registration and insurance card readily available so if stopped you can produce it without fumbling

If stopped be polite and keep both hands on the steering wheel

Do not agree to HGN... not generally accepted as evidence of impairment anyway...just PC to request real intoxicated teest

Do not agree to PBT...again not generally admissible to impairment...just PC for real test


Do not take field sobriety...walk and turn or one leg stand

If you have had ANYTHING to drink in past 4 hours do not take intoxilizer

If you do take intoxilizer and blow over demand an independent test at local emergency room at your own expense immediately.

After you get out call Saul;)

again, this thread is not about drinking and driving......

In Pa. the law was changed to avoid the problem of "relation back" of bac to driving to allow charging dui where you are .08 "within 2 hrs" of operation of a vehicle. Not sure what the appellate challenge status of that is.

I do understand the need to be careful with communication with a cop. However, often the approach of "you have my documents, now leave me alone" is just going to piss someone off.

Agreed I tried to steer it back. But in the defense of everyone jumping on the DUI discussion your original query was centired around implied consent

I'll just say that you need to remember protections against self incrimination apply only to criminal matters and not civil...implied consent laws are primarily civil/administrative sanctions... not criminal.

Caveat....admitting to a crime in a civil action can lead to criminal charges. So there are some instances we it's advisable to invoke the 5th in a civil action

Probably get you arrested for destruction of property - getting your blood on his shoe.

Well, it's never a good idea to be rude to the cop. But there's nothing illegal or even uncooperative about not helping him find PC to arrest you. As I mentioned, I refused a breath test, the cops uncuffed me, gave me a Coke, did about 20 min. of paperwork, drove me home, didn't tow my car and then wrote a nice note for me to the prosecutor. Doesn't always have to be a pissing match.