Group in Utah pushing to lower legal limit in DUI cases

In case you don't know I'm originally from Salt Lake City, Utah.  I have lived Washington State for the past 10 years, but I still follow the news and events in my hometown.  Especially when it comes to DUI news.  I recently saw an article discussing a recent proposal by a group in Utah when it comes to changing their DUI laws.

Utah, like Washington State, and the rest of the Country for that matter all employ a legal limit of 0.08% in DUI cases.  However a recent push has started to gain traction in Utah when it comes to that level.  A conservative think tank and advocate group for harsher liquor laws in Utah is pushing to lower the legal limit for a driver’s blood alcohol level.  

The Salt Lake City-based group named Sutherland Institute wants to lower the limit in Utah to 0.05%. Now this idea is nothing new.  In fact I previously blogged about this idea earlier this summer when the National Transportation Safety Board issued a similar recommendation for all the 50 states. What is interesting though is if there is any State in the Country that would seriously consider this idea and support legislation it would be Utah.

You see Utah is one of the most conservative States in the Country when it comes to liquor laws.  It's ironic for me personally moving from a complete conservative State like Utah to one of the most liberal in Washington State.  But I firmly believe this may gain some serious traction.  Most of the State Legislators belong to the predominant faith in Utah which is the LDS church.  In other words there are a lot of powerful people in that State Government that do no believe in the consumption of alcohol and make it their life's mission to some in cases force that belief on those that do.  

As a DUI Lawyer in Seattle I find this idea quite perplexing.  First I don't believe lowering the legal limit would do anything to decrease DUIs.  In fact it would probably increase them.  Think how many drinks a person has to have in order to get to a 0.05.  Not very many.  Probably 1 to 2 drinks.  How many people have wine at dinner or a single beer at a football game.  Now those people would be subject to a DUI arrest.  Secondly lowering the legal limit would effectively put the death grip on the restaurant and bar industry not to mention tourism.  It would be non-existent and that is a big part of where Government receives their funding.  

Should be interesting to see how serious this becomes in the future.

_
About the author: Matthew Leyba is a Bellevue DUI Lawyer.  His practice focuses on representing those charged with DUI and other serious traffic offenses throughout Western Washington.  He has been named a Top Seattle DUI Lawyer by Avvo.com as well as a Rising Star by Seattle Met Magazine in the area of DUI defense, an honor less than 2.5% of all Attorneys receive. 

Utah Trooper faces lawsuit for making bogus DUI arrests

In case you don't follow my other blog dealing with National DUI news and Information, I want to post my thoughts here on Utah Highway Patrol Trooper Steed and some issues that are occurring back in the great State of Utah.  

If you don't know I'm originally from Salt Lake City, Utah (Go Utes!).  So I follow news from Utah pretty regularly.  As I noted above, I have posted updates about Trooper Steed on my other DUI blog, but want to discuss it here today.

In case you don't know Trooper Steed is a Trooper with the Utah Highway Patrol.  During her 10 years with that Department she built the reputation as the best DUI cop in Utah.  As of today she is out of work and facing a lawsuit.  So what happened to her?  Someone who was seen as a rising star in the law enforcement.  Someone who her supervisors described as having an "uncanny ability to detect drunk drivers."  Someone who in 2009 as a member of the DUI squad shattered the record for most DUI arrests in Utah, more than double the number made by another other Utah Highway Patrol member in the history of the department.  

One word: Accountability, or I guess the lack thereof.  Lets be honest being a police officer has to be one heck of job.  Long hours.  In some cases low pay.  The general public has a certain disdain or distrust for you.  Defense Attorneys are always criticizing and challenging your work.  If you mess up it's on the front page of the news.  I know several officers here in Seattle, and although I'm a Defense Attorney I certainly can respect the work they do.  It seems to me to be like a thankless job for the most part.  

But I think the reason law enforcement has such a bad rap is because of what the general public views as a lack of accountability.  Think about it.  If a cop pulls someone over, makes an arrest, documents certain statements or observations of the suspect.  Who is to say this really happened?  I know cops sign an arrest report under penalty of perjury, and blah blah blah.  But many law enforcement agencies still do not have audio or video capabilities.  Even if the agency does have that capability, not all the officers use it.  Or the cameras are out of position.  Or the mic is not working, or in some cases left off.  Or some other excuse is made.

I can't tell you how many times I have represented someone who adamantly denies something the arresting officer is saying happened.  And how do you challenge that?  You can question the officer.  But if they made something up, or fabricated something, or even embellished it a little they are for the most part not going to deviate from that.  You can have the client testify, but in the end who is a Judge, or Jury going to find more reliable most times.  The cop.  So it is always a difficult position to address when it is one persons word against another.  And the other person happens to be a cop.

But every now and then a cop is caught in a lie, or an inconsistency and everything changes.  Such is the case with Trooper Steed.  As I wrote above she was a rising star with the DUI squad in the Utah Highway Patrol.  Shattering records for arrests, winning awards, etc.  But in the end what derailed her career is the lack of accountability that exists with such officers.  And probably her greed to become known as the Best DUI cop in Utah.  

And it all started with a routine motion to suppress evidence where she admitted on the stand that she left her mic off while on a DUI arrest.  To her credit she admitted to this.  I have had cases in the past where certain officers will swear up and down the mic was malfunctioning or the video was lost in magic land.  I never ceases to amaze me the elaborate tails these cops will weave just to avoid answering a simple question.  But when Steed did this her credibility instantly came under question.

You see there was a long standing rumor in Utah that Steed was fabricating observations she made on her DUI arrests.  Ridiculous things like flat out saying a person was impaired when a breath or blood test would show .000.  Making a DUI arrest when there was absolutely no evidence, and then just flat out making things up in the arrest report.  And nobody was ever the wiser, because there was no way to document what really happened, when it was just her word against the suspect.  

However like all things eventually the truth comes out and many of her DUI arrests were flat out dismissed or not filed due to her penchant for "stretching the truth."  In fact in 2010 a Prosecutor flat out told every Defense Attorney in Utah, and every news outlet that he would not prosecutor any cases where Steed was the primary officer, and the only evidence that existed were her observations.  But think about all the people she falsely arrested prior to this slip up in 2010.  

I can't fathom going through that.  Having the stigma of a DUI driver.  Hiring an attorney.  Going to court endless and stating your innocence and not having the Prosecutor, the Judge, or the very law enforcement agency who is supposed to protect you, believe your story.  That is why I do what I do.  So I can help people in these situations.  Thankfully to those attorneys in Utah, her truth stretching was uncovered and justice is being done.    

In case your interested here is the Steed article.  Read up.  

_

Matthew A. Leyba is a DUI Lawyer in Seattle, WA.  His practice focuses on representing those accused of DUI and other alcohol related offenses.         

Argument heard by the US Supreme Court on the DUI Case Missouri v. McNeely

Every once in a while a case that affects DUIs comes along that makes it all the way to the US Supreme Court.  Welcome to the case of Missouri v. McNeely where oral arguments were heard dealing with this particular issue.  So what is this case about you ask

Issue: Whether a law enforcement officer may obtain a non consensual and warrantless blood sample from a drunk driver under the exigent circumstances exception to the 4th amendment requirement of a warrant based on the natural dissipation of alcohol from the human body. 

In other words.  Can a cop force someone to give a blood sample without a warrant because alcohol exits a human body.  Keep in mind this is different that what is currently going on in Seattle DUI arrest cases where an officer can obtain a warrant to do a blood draw and force someone to provide a blood sample.  

Argument recap: Most of the hour long argument was spent discussing all the possibilities of exigent circumstances.  From a review of the transcripts of the argument it appears the Justices view the use of a needle to take a blood sample as quite an intrusive gesture by the government, and the 4th amendment shouldn't be discarded because alcohol is always going to be disappearing from the human bloodstream.  

To no surprise the lawyers for the state mainly argued there would never be enough time to get a warrant before alcohol dissipates.  Therefore the need to bypass the warrant requirement, and allow officers to force a blood draw on their own.  However what was pointed out by Justice Kennedy that half of the states do not allow the taking of a DUI blood sample without a warrant, and they have streamlined procedures for issuing warrants.  Steven Shapiro from the ACLU pointed out an interesting point.  He argued that getting a warrant was not a complex task, given the technology of lap tops, and cell phones that exist today.  

Overall from what I have read, and others opinions who were there it doesnt appear that the US Supreme Court will allow law enforcement officers to force blood draws without a warrant requirement.  Although you never know what is going to happen.  

_
Matthew Leyba is a Seattle DUI Lawyer.  His practice focuses on representing those accused of DUI and other serious traffic offenses.  He has offices in downtown Seattle, in Bellevue, and in Bothell.

New 9th Circuit case applicable to Seattle DUI cases

As part of my DUI practice I have to stay on top of the ever changing landscape of DUI related case law.  Whether its at the local DUI district court level, RALJ appeals, State Supreme Court, or even the National DUI news, the experienced DUI Lawyer must stay on top of it.

Recently I became aware of a case that came out of the Ninth Circuit United States Court of Appeals.  It not from Washington and it doesn't involve a DUI, but the reasoning can still be applied and argued here in Washington State when it comes to a DUI charge.  Below is a background of the case.

The defendant was stopped at about 1:43 am for allegedly having tinted windows.  The Officer who initiated the stop made contact and ran the drivers license.  Another officer arrived and ordered the driver to exit the vehicle.  As he exited the vehicle the primary officer pulled him aside and handcuffed him and told him to sit against the front bumper of the car.  For the next 25-30 minutes the Officers yelled at the defendant, harassed them, and threatened them.  All the while not conducting any sort of investigation.

The Ninth Circuit stated that a prolonged seizure without a valid investigatory purpose was unreasonable in violation of the fourth amendment.  The critical inquiry is whether the officers diligently pursued a means of investigation that was likely to confirm or dispel their suspicions.  In determining the reasonableness of the length of detention the Court looked at whether the Officers were acting swiftly to conduct an investigation or whether they used threats of force, or other unnecessary tactics.

Ultimately the Ninth Circuit held that an objectively reasonable officer responding to the scene of this detention would have known its duration of 45 minutes without probable cause, during which the Officers did nothing to diligently investigate was an unlawful detention and in violation of the 4th amendment.

So how does this related to Washington State DUI cases.  Well often times in my practice I have cases that involved the Seattle Police departments DUI squad.  This is a squad of officers that for the most part investigate Seattle DUI cases.  Often times the initial contact is made by a non-DUI squad officer and they call for back up.  The problem is when the non-DUI squad officer doesnt conduct any sort of investigation.  They dont ask the driver of the vehicle any follow up questions regarding alcohol consumption, or their driving.  They dont ask for the field sobriety tests, or the portable breath test.  They basically just detain the driver until a DUI squad officer arrives.

I believe this detention is unlawful unless the non-DUI squad officer conducts some kind of investigation.  I believe this is a violation of the 4th amendment based on the unreasonable length of detention and the lack of any sort of meaningful investigation into the DUI.

Remember if you have been contacted by a officer who suspects you of a DUI, its important to ask to speak with a DUI Attorney, not agree to any field sobriety tests or the portable breath test.  Exercise your right to remain silent and most of all be polite.

News article on DUI field sobriety tests

I recently came across this article discussing whether or not a person should do the field sobriety tests if they are being investigated for a DUI.  The news article is from Atlanta, but the gist of the article applies the same as here in Washington State.

Dr. Spurgoen Cole a retired physician is quoted in the article as saying, "[the field sobriety test] is designed to fail.  Its designed to fail.  There are no norms, there is no average score.  We have no idea what an average person can do on the one leg with the heel to toe."  And lastly he recommends that nobody takes them.

Hopefully most people know by know that if you're being investigated for a DUI, its probably best to not do the field sobriety tests (the tests in the field, always ask to speak with an attorney prior to the breath test at the station).  Although they may seem easy, when you take into account the circumstances, the situation, the environment, the lack of any real scoring system, and the fact your liberty is at stake.  These are not ideal test conditions, and the smallest mistake can mean the difference between jail and going home.  Not to mention my personal opinion is that these tests are nothing but junk science and I do believe they are designed for a person to fail.  As as attorney I feel its always best to limit the amount of evidence law enforcement can gather against you.  You have the right to remain silent and the right to be free from self incrimination.  This includes the right to not answer questions, but also the right to decline these field sobriety tests.

If you have been arrested for a DUI, and you agreed to take the tests.  All is not lost.  There are still plenty of ways to challenge the admissibility of these tests, albeit it makes the DUI case more difficult.  Feel free to call my office for a free 60 minute consultation if you have been recently arrested for a DUI.

Leyba Defense PLLC | DUI Defense

Huntington Beach won't put DUI arrests on Facebook

I posted the first article regarding this topic earlier in the week.  It now looks like this idea is being shot down by the Huntington Beach, CA city council.  This new article discusses some of the public backlash this idea was receiving, as well as some of the problems I discussed.  Mainly a person's right to be presumed innocent, and privacy laws to mention a few.

Matthew A. Leyba | Attorney
Leyba Defense PLLC | Seattle DUI