Understanding DWI Offenses: Legal Environment & Case Precedents

1. Session 3 1 Hour 10 Minutes The Legal Environment

2. Learning Objectives Become familiar with: • Elements of DWI offenses • Provisions of the implied consent law • The relevance of chemical test evidence • Precedents established through case law 3-2

3. Basic DWI Statute • It is unlawful for any person to operate or be in actual physical control of any vehicle within this state while under the influence of alcohol and/or any drug. 3-3

4. DWI Violation Arrest • Probable Cause • Person in question operating or in actual physical control of vehicle while under the influence: • Alcohol • Another drug • Both 3-4

5. Conviction • Establish all four elements were present • Operation • Control • Vehicle • Impairment • Criminal offense – establish facts “beyond a reasonable doubt” • Infraction – standard of proof may be less • Collect and document all evidence 3-5

6. It is unlawful for any person to: Operate or be in actual physical control Of any vehicle Within this state While having a BAC at or above the state’s level Illegal Per Se Statute 3-6

7. Establish BAC was at or above state level while operating vehicle in state Not necessary to establish impairment To Convict Illegal Per Se 3-7

8. Each defines a separate offense: DWI – driving while under influence Chemical test is presumptive evidence Illegal Per Se – operate while having more than legal percent of alcohol in blood or breath Chemical test is conclusive evidence Illegal Per Se and DWI 3-8

9. Aid in prosecution of DWI offenders Show the driver’s BAC was at or above state level Often required to secure conviction Illegal Per Se Purpose 3-9

10. Continue to rely on your detection training and experience When making a DWI arrest assume chemical tests will not be available Present your observations clearly Thorough documentation is critical Illegal Per Se Summary 3-10

11. Implied Consent • Laws and Presumptions • “Under the influence” is difficult to prove • State statutes vary 3-11

12. Key Features of Implied Consent • Operates or controls motor vehicle • Upon state public highways • Driver must consent to chemical test to determine blood alcohol and/or drug content • When arrested for acts committed while operating under the influence of alcohol and/or any drug 3-12

13. Legal Presumptions • BAC _____or more • Presumed under the influence • Less than _____ • Presumed not under the influence • At least _____ but below _____ • No presumption 3-13

14. Example Number 1 • Is it possible for a person whose BAC is above the state’s per se or presumptive level to be acquitted of DWI? 3-14

15. Example Number 2 • Is it possible for a person whose BAC was below the state’s per se or presumptive level to be convicted of DWI? 3-15

16. Key Point • Chemical test evidence is presumptive, not conclusive 3-16

17. Preliminary Breath Testing (PBT) 3-17

18. PBT Application 3-18

19. Case Law Reviews • Landmark court decisions relevant to the admissibility of Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (SFSTs) and Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN) • Challenges based on: • Scientific validity and reliability • Relationship of HGN to specific BAC level • Officer training, experience, and application 3-19

20. State v. Blake • State versus Blake (718 P.2d 171 Arizona 1986)is the landmark case • The Blake case established a very important precedent in Arizona. 3-20

21. State v. Blake (Cont.) • After the defendant was stopped for DUI, he was given field sobriety tests • The officer also administered a Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN) test • SCRI researchers found that they could determine whether a person was above or below a .10 blood alcohol level 80% of the time. 3-21

22. State v. Blake (Cont.) • The trial court ruled that the HGN test was not reliable under Frye v. United States and thus could not be used as part of probable cause. Accordingly, the court dismissed the prosecution. The STATE appealed this decision. • Did the trial court err in excluding the HGN evidence? 3-22

23. Is the HGN Test Sufficiently Reliable? 3-23

24. People v. Loomis • Arresting officer attempted to testify to his opinion concerning the subject's BAC based solely on the angle of onset of HGN • Court held Officer was not: • Entitled to testify as a lay or expert witness about HGN • Formally or properly trained in HGN 3-24

25. State v. Blake • First case decided at a State Supreme Court • HGN satisfies the Frye standards for evidence to corroborate, or attack, the issue of a subject's impairment • Frye standards are those set by the U.S. Supreme Court to govern the admissibility of "new" scientific evidence 3-25

26. Landmark Court DecisionsRelevant to the Admissibility of the SFSTs • Challenges to admissibility based on: • Scientific validity and reliability • Relationship of HGN to specific BAC level • Officer training, experience, and application 3-26

27. State v. Murphy • Results of a HGN test could be admitted into evidence at a DWI trial to prove intoxication of the driver • Not used to determine specific BAC • Officer did not have to qualify as an expert witness because the observations were objective in nature and the officer needed no special qualifications to be able to interpret the results 3-27

28. State v. Homan • SFSTs conducted in a manner that departs from the methods established by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) “are inherently unreliable” 3-28

29. Smith v. Wyoming • State Supreme Court: • Held a law enforcement officer may testify to the results of field sobriety tests (including HGN) if officer has been adequately trained in the administration and assessment of those field sobriety tests, and conducted them in substantial accordance with that training • Stated “deficiencies in the administration of the sobriety tests go to the weight accorded the evidence and not to its admissibility” 3-29

30. People v. McKown • HGN testing satisfies the Frye standard in Illinois • HGN testing is one facet of field sobriety • The witness has been adequately trained, and conducted assessment in accordance with the training • In conjunction with other evidence, HGN may be used as a part of the police officer’s opinion that the subject [was] under the influence and impaired” 3-30

31. People v. McKown (Cont.) • The officer can testify that based on the totality of the circumstances, including HGN, that (s)he formed the opinion that the subject was under the influence of alcohol. 3-31

32. State v. Wilkes • Seizure Case 3-32

33. State v. Wilkes (Cont.) 3-33

34. Case Law Summary 3-34

35. Test Your Knowledge • The elements of the Basic DWI Law are: A. B. C. D. • If DWI is a criminal offense, the standard of proof is _____. 3-35

36. Test Your Knowledge • The purpose of the implied consent law is _____. • Under the implied consent law, chemical test evidence is _____ evidence. • The illegal per se law makes it unlawful to _____. 3-36

37. Test Your Knowledge • The PBT law permits a police officer to request a driver suspected of DWI to _____. • PBT results are used to help determine _____. • The landmark Supreme Court case regarding HGN was ______. 3-37