Does one have to consent to field sobriety tests?

Question

Legally speaking, if you're pulled over and the officer suspects you for DUI are you required by law to consent to a field sobriety test? It's my understanding that they are not legally enforceable (meaning that just b/c the cops want you to do one you can tell them no). I understand that, at least in AZ, you have to consent to a breathalyzer or lose your license for 1 year. But what about those goofy FSTs? Aren't they just coordination games that will only lead to a cops probable cause? And if you refuse to take a FST is there any repercussion?

Answer 1

FST's are so you can show you're NOT under the influence, or they provide the police with evidence of your intoxication. You're not legally obligated to take an FST, however (having worked a DUI car for 12 months and arresting 1000 DUI's with an 98% conviction rate) the officer will then have to make a determination based on observed driving, odor of alcohol, and your ability to hold an intelligent conversation.

Most of the time the violator will be arrested. You are then required by administrative codes to take a chemical test, blood, breath or urine, to determine the level of intoxication, or you loose your license for 1 year.

In California there are 2 sections to DUI. One is being at or over the legal limit (of .08%) the other is driving while impaired. If I can show your driving was adversly affected by your drinking, even though your Blood Alcohol level was low, then you can be convicted of this section.

Personally, now that I'm retired, I wouldn't take ANY tests. No FST's and No chemical tests.

If you refuse you loose your license for 1 year because of the administrative section in the DMV. This is not an admission of guilt. It is a violation of the contract you signed when you applied for and received your license. It does not mean you will automatically be convicted because the officer still have to PROVE your intoxication, you don't have to prove you WEREN'T. However, if you DO take the chemical test, and test over the limit, you will have a conviction. You CAN loose your license for a year anyway because of the criminal violation, AND you have a DUI on your driving record for 10 years. With court costs, and insurance increases that will cost you over $20,000.

If they don't have your FST's, and no BA, all you have is your attorney fees. These are tough cases to win because of lack of evidence. Any competent attorney can win this case.

The only time this changes is if you are involved in an injury accident and (at least in California) the police can forcibly take a blood sample. That;s only for injury accidents where DUI is suspected.

If you're a driver regulated by DOT (if you don't know what that is then you probably aren't one) you are required by federal law to submit to a BA test after ANY accident. (also forcible if necessary)

Cheers.

Answer 2

Most states have the laws written that you can choose what you have done. If you refuse the FST then you can choose to either do a breathalizer or go back to the station and get a blood test. Of course each of these takes a lot more time. There are some FSTs that don't require a lot of coordination. They have some where they just ask you questions the whole time and based on your answers they can determine if you're intoxicated.

Answer 3

You do not have to consent to a FST. Remember, you cannot be forced to do anything. Just tell them that you do not consent to taking a FST or a breath or blood test. You may loose your driving privileges, but it is the best way to beat a DUI. All the DA will have is the opinion of the officer, but will not have any other evidence, like the failed FST or portions of the test, for instance, if you stand on one foot ( a popular test) and you fall over, that will look very bad to a jury, couple that with a breath test of .15, and you are going to be found guilty 100 out of 100 times.

If you only have the officer testify that he thought you were drunk, based on his training, it is much easier to convince a jury that maybe he was wrong, or over zealous, etc. NOT GUILTY is a foreseeable result.

Hope this helps.

Answer 4

In most states the answer is no. As with any legal issue the answer depends on the state. Every action you take after being targeted as a possible DUI is admissible as probable cause. The FST is simply additional PC but not required to make an arrest. Declining the FST will, in most cases, result in your being arrested anyways and then you will be asked to submit to a breath, blood or urine test. Declining these tests almost always leads to a guilty verdict as the law will mandate you submit to them.

Answer 5

In Illinois, if you refuse to take a breathalyzer or FST, you automatically lose your license. There is more to probable cause than a refusal to take either test at the officer's request - for instance, smell of alcohol, some behaviors, slurred speech, eye movements. Too, very often in Illinois, probable cause arises even before you have been pulled over for suspicion of drunk driving. Best solution: get a designated driver or call a cab.

Answer 6

Yes. When you sign your drivers license, you consent to submit to a blood alcohol test.
In California, it is called "Implied Consent."
Refusal to submit to a BAC test results in the automatic suspension of your drivers license.
The arresting officer will be at your trial and will testify that based on their __ years of experience in arresting drivers under the influence you were intoxicated. If they have had drug recognition training (like I have) they can also testify that they saw symptoms like nystagmus, alcohol on the breath, slurred speech, etc.
BTW - if you are refuse a second time in a 10 year period, the DMV takes your license away for 2 years.

Answer 7

frequently the sphere sobriety try comes earlier any tissue pattern is taken i.e. Breathalyzer. the reason of the sphere try is to confirm if the officer has purely reason to bypass forward with scientific info. be careful, this try is often recorded and could be used against you whether you do no longer do the breathalyzer. Your speech and motions would be recorded. you are able to refuse a Breathalyzer in maximum aspects, and as you suggested you frequently lose your license for executing that good. you additionally can refuse the sphere try, yet you would be located under arrest for doing so. you have the ultimate suited to no longer answer any questions, and to watch for a felony expert at any time, from the 2nd you're pulled over to the 2nd you're released. Its ultimate to no longer say something, particularly issues like "I had 4 beers" and so on. and so on. considering the indisputable fact which will additionally be utilized in courtroom once you bypass to trial. continually refuse the sphere try, and the actual tissue try. this is not any longer your activity to offer them with info against you. And "you're no longer responsible" until eventually shown so in courtroom. You had your liscense revoked simply by fact of a settlement you signed whilst recieving it, you agreed to take a breathalizer if ever asked. yet a refusal isn't an request for forgiveness. this is rather important, you have the ultimate suited to a tribulation to confirm in case you have been in certainty legally intoxicated.

Answer 8

You don't have to do the field sobriety tests like - walk in a straight line with your hands out and your head back....now lift up one leg...

but you DO have to take a breathalyser or a blood test, if requested.

Answer 9

I am not sure if you have to submit to field sobriety tests. If you don't, they will just arrest you, take you to the police station, and give you a breathalyser, which you are legally required to submit to.

Answer 10

You can refuse the test - if cop thinks you are drunk - he can arrest you and then test you via a blood test in jail