I’m Hispanic and I live in Utah, it was Wednesday I was driving Northbound on the freeway around 16:15 heading home from work the traffic was very heavy because the construction going on & I was falling asleep and weaving, I was pulled over for UHP;(Utah Highway Patrol) the officer (he is Anglo-American) asked me if I have had drink any alcohol or drugs and I told him No, that I don’t even smoke, I was just tired that I was coming from work, and then he asked me if I take any medication, I told him Yes and they were prescribed by my doctor the last pain med that I took was in Tuesday around 18:30, then he did the sobriety test (English is my 2nd languish) then he arrest me for DUI, at that moment I got a phone call from my wife to see where I was, the officer answer my phone and told my wife that I was arrested for DUI, that he’s going to impound the truck, my wife told the officer that she can pick the truck-up and the officer’s answer was, “No that he’s going to impound it and take me to jail. I request the breathalyzer, blood & urine test to be done to me, and all test results came back negative and he still charged me with DUI, he impound my truck, I had to pay the tow truck and the impound, I lose a night of work (I work graveyards 2nd job) he injured my right shoulder because he handcuff me for a couple hours, I asked and then I beg if he can put the handcuff in front instead of my back because my shoulder was hurting; and the officer said “NO” that he won’t do it. I went to court they dismissed the DUI charged, but I end it up with this big bill that put a big blow to my financial situation and injured shoulder and nobody wants to take responsibility, and my questions are, can I Sue UHP for what they did to me? Do I have a case; I have proof of everything.
-
FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.
Do I have a case? Can I sue UHP?
- Thread starter ldasober
- Start date
Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills Please click a topic or scroll down for more.
Yes you can sue
You can sue and you can also file a complaint with the USDOJ on the ifficers conduct, not to mention the fact that you stated you had a shoulder injury and he did not accomidate you. Also I would file a complaint with UHP, also consult with a lawyer and go see a doctor to see if any additional damage was done to your shoulder. Don't listen to half these people, most of them are cops trying to tell your wrong.read this.
Similarly, in Turek v. Saluga, #01-3986, 01-4018, 47 Fed. Appx. 746 (Unpub. 6th Cir. 2002), a federal appeals court found that a deputy sheriff’s alleged action in handcuffing an arrestee “too tightly” and refusing to loosen the handcuffs after learning that the arrestee had preexisting arm and shoulder injuries would, if true, have violated clearly established law.
By the time the cuffs were ultimately removed, both his hands were allegedly "completely numb," and the feeling in his right hand allegedly did not return even after several weeks. A neurologist later indicated that the cuffs had caused "a new neurological injury to the ulnar nerve" of the arrestee's right wrist, resulting in the loss of function to his right hand.
The court found that the arrestee posed no threat to the officer's safety, and made no attempt to resist the arrest. Additionally, while the deputy told the arrestee that it was against departmental policy to handcuff arrestees in the front, as he requested because of his pre-existing injuries, the county sheriff's policy manual contained an exception: "Where the health and safety of the suspect might be compromised, the suspect may be handcuffed with the hands in front
You can sue and you can also file a complaint with the USDOJ on the ifficers conduct, not to mention the fact that you stated you had a shoulder injury and he did not accomidate you. Also I would file a complaint with UHP, also consult with a lawyer and go see a doctor to see if any additional damage was done to your shoulder. Don't listen to half these people, most of them are cops trying to tell your wrong.read this.
Similarly, in Turek v. Saluga, #01-3986, 01-4018, 47 Fed. Appx. 746 (Unpub. 6th Cir. 2002), a federal appeals court found that a deputy sheriff’s alleged action in handcuffing an arrestee “too tightly” and refusing to loosen the handcuffs after learning that the arrestee had preexisting arm and shoulder injuries would, if true, have violated clearly established law.
By the time the cuffs were ultimately removed, both his hands were allegedly "completely numb," and the feeling in his right hand allegedly did not return even after several weeks. A neurologist later indicated that the cuffs had caused "a new neurological injury to the ulnar nerve" of the arrestee's right wrist, resulting in the loss of function to his right hand.
The court found that the arrestee posed no threat to the officer's safety, and made no attempt to resist the arrest. Additionally, while the deputy told the arrestee that it was against departmental policy to handcuff arrestees in the front, as he requested because of his pre-existing injuries, the county sheriff's policy manual contained an exception: "Where the health and safety of the suspect might be compromised, the suspect may be handcuffed with the hands in front
ReformedMan
Member
Do you have any idea a case like that would cost to litigate, even IF he found an attorney willing to take it on? If he's already in a financial bind, it's completely out of the question. Not to mention the fact that you wouldn't win. You had the DUI dropped; take that as a win and move on.
what? did you not read my post
Not o0nly can he find a lawyer but most lawyers would take this on a contingint basis knowing one third of the final proceeds will be there's.Listen just because they cops it doesn't make them right they not above the law and this man complained not only was it hurting his shoulder(personal injury) but didn't seem a threat at the time he most certainly can be cuffed in the front once inside the cruiser. After all he wasn't found guilty of the DUI and after all the evidence supported his claim of not driving under the influance we could be looking at racial profiling. Believe somone will take his case all he has to do is a little calling around and most lawyers like cases like this.
Not o0nly can he find a lawyer but most lawyers would take this on a contingint basis knowing one third of the final proceeds will be there's.Listen just because they cops it doesn't make them right they not above the law and this man complained not only was it hurting his shoulder(personal injury) but didn't seem a threat at the time he most certainly can be cuffed in the front once inside the cruiser. After all he wasn't found guilty of the DUI and after all the evidence supported his claim of not driving under the influance we could be looking at racial profiling. Believe somone will take his case all he has to do is a little calling around and most lawyers like cases like this.
ReformedMan
Member
I was going to try to make sense of this post, but my brain has had enough abuse at work this week. If you wanna try to sue, sure go for it! Post back when you're in incredible debt after you've lost. I love saying "I told you so", but my girlfriend won't allow me the opportunity.
OHHHH, so you are a doctor?
There was probable cause. The police officer does not have to let a person being booked answer his/her cell phone.
The police officer may require the impound of a car... especially in a crowded construction zone.
The police officer does not have to uncuff and recuff you because you said to.
I don't think you would have a guess...
tranquility
Senior Member
Artculate the probable cause.
Now, there may be more facts the OP is unaware of and the facts he has given us may be slanted, but *on the facts alone*, I don't even see an arguable level of probable cause. It is entirely possible, absent more, qualified immunity would not apply.
That being said does not mean there is a case. There are almost assuredly other facts and different facts out there. But, a bald statement claiming "there was probable cause" cannot be supported and is the key to the entire post.
Zigner
Senior Member, Non-Attorney
How about this: I was falling asleep and weaving.
He was weaving through heavy traffic in a construction zone.
Sounds like a great reason for a stop to me.
tranquility
Senior Member
I completely agree this is at least the legal requirement, *reasonable suspicion* to do a stop.(Let's at least use the property jargon so people won't think us fools.) If that were the issue being discussed, we would be done.
Now, on that admittedly legal stop, the police find a man with (by our facts) no admitted drugs or alcohol in the system and a reasonable explination for why the prior events happened. Now, for the $64,000 question, USING THOSE FACTS ALONE does the totality of the circumstances lead a reasonable person of like experience and training to believe a crime has been or is occuring? (Aka, "probable cause" the standard of when a police officer can arrest someone.) I believe not. At best, it is arguable. It certainly is not sure enough and does not properly deal with the issue the OP is asking about to arbitrarily determine there was probable cause and move on.
While the officer certainly had probable cause to pull him over for swerving while falling asleep, I would imagine that when the OP stated that he took prescription meds for pain, that the officer suspected that it may have been these meds that were causing his sleepiness.
Considering all the people killed by drivers with alcohol/drugs in their system, the officer probably felt it best to err on the side of safety.
Also, we shouldn't minimize the fact that falling asleep because your tired is just as dangerous as driving under the influence and perhaps even more so. It is also unusual to have drivers falling asleep at 4:15 in the afternoon. Not that it doesn't happen, but it would be more common to find this late at night/early in the morning and after driving for a long distance.
So all in all, I don't think the OP will have much success claiming the officer was doing any racial profiling or that the arrest was completely unjustified.
Especially if there is video evidence from a camera mounted on the police cruiser which shows the OP swerving all over the road.
But the OP is certainly entitled to file a civil suit against the officer and his department. But if he can't find an attorney who is willing to take the case without a large retainer, he may as well just accept the fact that he doesn't stand a very good chance of winning much of a settlement.
Another way of looking at it is this: Maybe the officer saved the OP's life or the life of another by getting this guy off the street before he snored his way into the inevitable accident that results whenever someone goes to sleep at the wheel.
Considering all the people killed by drivers with alcohol/drugs in their system, the officer probably felt it best to err on the side of safety.
Also, we shouldn't minimize the fact that falling asleep because your tired is just as dangerous as driving under the influence and perhaps even more so. It is also unusual to have drivers falling asleep at 4:15 in the afternoon. Not that it doesn't happen, but it would be more common to find this late at night/early in the morning and after driving for a long distance.
So all in all, I don't think the OP will have much success claiming the officer was doing any racial profiling or that the arrest was completely unjustified.
Especially if there is video evidence from a camera mounted on the police cruiser which shows the OP swerving all over the road.
But the OP is certainly entitled to file a civil suit against the officer and his department. But if he can't find an attorney who is willing to take the case without a large retainer, he may as well just accept the fact that he doesn't stand a very good chance of winning much of a settlement.
Another way of looking at it is this: Maybe the officer saved the OP's life or the life of another by getting this guy off the street before he snored his way into the inevitable accident that results whenever someone goes to sleep at the wheel.
CdwJava
Senior Member
As has been stated, this is reasonable suspicion to detain.
Presumably, if he performed the tests properly, he developed the probable cause to make the arrest based upon your performance. As Tranquility points out, this may be a weak point in the prosecution's case if the officer can not adequately articulate the probable cause to make the arrest. Since the tests apparently came back negative (presumably) for drugs and alcohol, then that makes the case a little weaker. It may well depend on the medication you were taking.
Blood and urine tests take time to come back, unless they did a presumptive test on the urine which is not that accurate. So, I imagine they took a breath test which came back negative and then sent the blood or urine off to be tested for drugs. Since the matter was dismissed, I imagine they came back negative.
Typically the police will NOT handcuff a person in front ... there exists a parade of dead officers that made that mistake in years past. It is extremely rare that a prisoner gets cuffed in front. We carry belly chains in some of our cars should that situation arise.
You can sue anyone for anything. You may want to consult an attorney who can evaluate the totality of the circumstances to determine your likelihood of collecting any damages. If there appears to be objective probable cause to make the arrest. it may not be wise to spend thousands of dollars on a suit that might stand a minimal chance of success. On the other hand, if the officer was sloppy or failed to properly articulate his probable cause, a claim might result in a settlement under the circumstances. Consult that legal counsel.
- Carl
Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!
Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">