DWI in Missouri

[MrGlass]

What is the name of your state? Missouri

I am waiting to hear from a local attorney, In the mean time I was doing my own background finding. I took a friend to the hospital using their car and was in a minor (small dent) fender bump on the highway. I pulled over and was exchanging information when a County Police Officer pulled up and had me do a field test which he said I failed. He arrested me and said he was giving me three tickets 1. DWI 2. No proof of Insurance 3. expired plates - now I know I should not be driving (now) but at the time my friend was suicidal and I was more concerned for them.. I did not know the plates were expired - I did not know that their plates were expired - and finally I did not believe that I had an illegal amount of alcohol in my system. Upon arriving at the County Jail the officer explained that I had to take a breath analysis or face losing my license for a year. I told him that I was not refusing to take the test but wanted to talk to my lawyer first. He stated that I did not have that right - and that I had to take the test. So I took the test and failed.. The officer gave me the three tickets , did not have me sign them - did not finger print or take any mug shots - I know this sounds like I'm looking for a technicality, but I thought they had to go thru certain procedures properly.. I know I was wrong and I am responsible for this but was just wondering what anyone elses take was on this.. The department let me go about three hours later with no bail or fees of any kind. (just for Info purposes)

Thanks in advance for reading, GlassWhat is the name of your state?

 

[seniorjudge]

Sounds to me (based solely on the information provided in your post) that you are guilty of all three.

(Expired tags and no proof of insurance requires no knowledge; you either have valid tags or you do not; you either have proof of insurance or do not.)

 

[MrGlass]

I do agree- I believe I said I take the responsibility for this - it just seems that while I followed everything asked of - the officer went about getting my breath analysis without regard of what I believe to be my rights - saying I have to take the test seems like something untrue.. That was what I was questioning..

Thank you, Glass

 

[seniorjudge]

Again based solely on what you posted, the officer correctly cited the law on breath tests.

It is considered non-testimonial evidence and is not covered by the right against self-incrimination or the right to counsel.

 

[MrGlass]

Ok then I guess I do not have a right to call my lawyer - who may have told me not to blow and give the county proof.. My bad - I thought I did have some rights.

 

[seniorjudge]

Ok then I guess I do not have a right to call my lawyer - who may have told me not to blow and give the county proof.. My bad - I thought I did have some rights.

Any lawyer who would have told you that would've been committing malpractice.

Had you not taken the test, you would've lost your license regardless of whether you were drunk.

 

[FlyingRon]

In Missouri (as in most state) you've already (implicitly) consented to the test by obtaining the license. ( RSMo 577.020. 1).

Actually you should have been granted 20 minutes to talk to a lawyer.

What basis do you have for thinking you weren't intoxicated?

How old are you?

Next time, call 911 and they'll send this large car with lights all over it that will most certainly have lights, sirens, a sober driver, and insurance.

 

[sjmjuly]

You do have the right to refuse the test. But the law states it has the right to suspend your license for an extended period of time if you refuse.
Whenever someone becomes licensed in a state, the driving privledges (yes it is a privledge, not a right) they agree to submit to a breath test if an officer believes them to be under the influence. It's in the state driver's manual. In addition, if there wasn't a stiff penalty for refusing a test, everyone would refuse.
Consider yourself lucky on not being finger printed or photographed. While it's a procedure, it's not something you can hang your hat on and have the charge dismissed.
You need an attorney.

 

[MrGlass]

I never said I wasnt intoxicated - but I was hoping someone else would also agree that I should have been afforded the 20 min to call a lawyer, who would have given me clearer information and consequences than my officer did - simply put - I believe now that my lawyer would have told me that yes I can refuse - It will cost a year of driving, however there would be no proof of intoxication.. I would have been given the actual options instead of the one that the officer was wanting to accomplish..

 

[seniorjudge]

Why do you think there would be no evidence of intoxication?

 

[MrGlass]

I believe that a breath analysis is more concrete than a judgement call of a field sobriety test.

 

[seniorjudge]

I believe that a breath analysis is more concrete than a judgement call of a field sobriety test.

You are correct, but that is a nonresponsive answer, which is fancy lawyer talk for, "You didn't answer my question!"

 

[MrGlass]

OK (smile) I believe that there would be no/little evidence if only the field test was used - due to the nature of field tests being a "judgement call" seriously is it wording that makes it non respnsive?

Thanks, GLass

 

[seniorjudge]

The cop is an expert witness. Had you not taken the test, he would've testified how you smelled, what you talked like, what you did, etc. He would also testify as to the hundreds of drunks he has arrested or seen arrested.

The prosecutor then would have said, "Do you have an opinion as to whether he was above the legal limit?"

"Yes."

"And what is that opinion?"

"He was well above the legal limit."

 

[seniorjudge]

State representatives, state senators, and, yes, even judges in Missouri seem to have a tendency to get arrested for drunk driving.

Surely you read the newspapers or listen to the news!