DWI defense attorneys are, at times, asked about possible DWI defenses. There are a number of possible DUI defense strategies that can be used. Below are some potential defenses that should first be reviewed by your DWI defense lawyer:
1. Is there enough evidence to establish that the defendant was operating the motor vehicle at the time at the relevant time?
In DWI cases, the relevant time refers to the time wherein the defendant was determined to be under the influence of alcohol, or when the defendant had a BAC of at least .08.
Majority of DWI arrests result from a traffic stop wherein the defendant was behind the wheel. This first issue becomes relevant when the defendant is not actually seen by the officer to be operating the motor vehicle. In this situation, the defense attorney must review all evidence that the government offers to establish driving conduct or even physical control of the vehicle at the relevant time.
2. Was the DWI suspect’s traffic stop or initial seizure by reasonable suspicion?
Before a police officer is allowed to stop a driver in his vehicle, the officer must have reasonable suspicion to believe that the defendant has committed a traffic violation or criminal activity. If the court determines that a reasonable articulable suspicion was lacking, then all evidence that was obtained after the stop is considered potentially inadmissible.
3. Was there probable cause to arrest the driver for driving under the influence of alcohol?
After a traffic stop, there must be probable cause to allow for a driver’s chemical testing and further detention at the police station. In a DWI case in Minnesota, a police officer must be able to establish probable cause that the driver is under the influence of alcohol through field sobriety tests. Among the more common field sobriety tests are HGN or Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus and standing on one leg for approximately 30 seconds. It is also likely that the officer will ask the driver to take a preliminary breath test at the scene of the initial stop.
4. Was the driver’s right to counsel supported prior to his being asked to submit to a blood, urine, or breath test?
In the state of Minnesota, all police officers are required to read the Minnesota Implied Consent Advisory to drivers before any form of testing. A portion of this advisory allows the driver to contact an attorney prior to testing. If the driver wishes to speak with an attorney, then the officer must give the driver access to a phone and give the driver a reasonable period of time to consult with legal counsel.
A reasonable period of time, however, is dependent on factors such as the time of day in which the arrest occurred, and the amount of diligence the driver showed in his attempt to contact a lawyer.
5. If the driver requests a test independent of the state’s chemical test, was the driver given access to a phone to make necessary arrangements?
If a driver submits to the state’s chemical test and would still like to have his own urine or blood test done, then the police officer must give the driver access to a phone to arrange the administration of the second test.
6. Did the police officer use a reliable testing method to determine the driver’s BAC?
When it comes to breath tests in Minnesota, the state currently uses the Datamaster DMT and the Intoxilyzer 5000EN. A criminal defense lawyer must carefully review every single testing method used in order to ensure reliability and to determine whether all standards were met.
Of course, these 6 potential DWI defenses or issues in a Minnesota DWI case are not comprehensive in nature. However, these are the perfect starting point for any criminal defense lawyer who is reviewing a client’s case.
