Dwi

What is the name of your state? Missouri
My son is 22 years old and is being charged with a DWI even though he blew a .049 which is well below the state legal limit. He passed the roadside sobriety test so I do not understand how these charges can made. The prosecutor offers to lower the charge to careless and imprudent but he must pay hundreds of dollars in additional fines and court costs.

[HomeGuru]

Originally posted by Ron Gravemann
What is the name of your state? Missouri
My son is 22 years old and is being charged with a DWI even though he blew a .049 which is well below the state legal limit. He passed the roadside sobriety test so I do not understand how these charges can made. The prosecutor offers to lower the charge to careless and imprudent but he must pay hundreds of dollars in additional fines and court costs.

**A: yes, so what is your point? He was drinking, was he not?

[JETX]

Clearly, either you or us is not being told the FULL story.

Hmm, he blew a .049. So he was drinking, right? So what if he passed the test. They can still prosecute him for driving under the influence (DUI) instead of driving while intoxicated (DWI).

He's 22 and still does not know drinking and driving don't mix? Pay the fines and be done with it. Learn the lesson the hard way and be thankful he's still alive and didn't kill somebody else.

how dry i am.. how dry i am, how wet i'll be if i dont find the bathroom key.

I don't support driving after any level of alchol consumtion but when a limit is set at .08 most people assume that implies it's ok to have a couple of beers which would be well below that limit. Who hasn't had a beer or glass of wine with dinner and gotten into a car? If all drinking and driving is to be considered illegal the law should read that way. Why bother to give a breath test if it doesn't mean anything? Everyone I have discussed this with seems surprised that this case is being prosecuted even though he passed all of the tests. I have no sympathy for someone who breaks the law and feel they should suffer through the consequences. In this instance, that is not the case. He was not intoxicated by either his or the states definition.

[JETX]

Most people don't realize that there are TWO separate ways for the prosecutor to prove a DWI case:
* (1) By proving that the defendant was a less safe driver due to impairment by alcohol and/or drugs (including prescription or non-prescription drugs) by using the officer's observations, including manner of driving, field sobriety tests, the smell of alcohol, etc.
* (2) By proving that the defendant was driving a vehicle at a time when his blood alcohol level was .08 or greater. The prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the test the defendant was given was a valid test and administered properly.

For more, go to:
[url]http://www.enhlaw.com/dui_guide_mo.htm[/url]
[url]http://www.mo-drunkdrivinglawyer.com/stateinfo/adminlaw.htm[/url]

Ron-
Does your son have a Commercial Driver's License? (CDL) The rules are very harsh for them whether or not they are working.
Was he involved in a non-reportable crash (no injuries, both vehicles able to be driven from the scene)?
Did he have drugs in his system of in his possession? Any of these things could cause this incident to rise to the level of a DUI.

Perhaps he was swerving? Driving with no lights on? Driving really really slow. Add that to the fact that he was drinking anyway and there are other ways to prove DWI/DUI. Smack your boy around and tell not to drink and drive.

[JETX]

And just as likely, maybe he had just gotten a 'complete' medical exam on board an UFO and was just beamed into the drivers seat.... and was simply still dazed.
Don't try to make up 'imagined' gee what if scenarios.

What is there to make up? He didn't state why his boy was pulled over in the first place.

It's also very possible that he did NOT pass the SFST (Standard Field Sobriety Test), the HGN (Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus) test.
The officer amy have seen something there that indicated the presence of illegal drug use.

[JETX]

Correct and all we KNOW is what the writer told us. Anything else about 'what if' and 'coulda been' is just that.
Rather than impose the 'what if', the proper thing would have been to ask questions, not make presumptions.

I was making the point that there are other ways of being charged with DWI/DUI since the original poster did not understand how the charges are being made.

JETX-
true 'dat,
thanks for reminding me.