Florida DUI Lawyer Blog

According to Broward DUI attorney William Moore, the National Traffic Safety Board is a federal administrative body that handles matters pertaining to motor vehicle traffic, as well as marine, rail, air, and other types of transit. The Board often issues advisories regarding issues relating to these types of transit, with an emphasis on its primary objective -- safety. In November 2010, it issued a statement on dealing with “hard core drinking drivers,” referring to a specific set of DUI crimes that the Board has deemed unusually dangerous for public safety. Not all of its recommendations, however, hold water or are even realistic in modern courtrooms.

The statement’s objective is to remove “habitual drinking drivers” from the highways of the United States. Among the “grim facts” listed: “Repeat offenders represent about one-third of all drivers arrested or convicted of driving while intoxicated or under the influence of alcohol.” This statement is problematic because convictions are far more relevant than arrests. A driver is presumed innocent of driving under the influence unless and until he is convicted of the offense in a court of law. The NTSB may be including arrests in order to bump the numbers to a higher percentage than those actually convicted of DUI would show, says Fort Lauderdale DUI lawyer Moore.

The NTSB also suggests that states operate widepread, frequent sobriety checkpoints (also known as DUI roadblocks). As we have previously written about, DUI checkpoints are extremely ineffective at apprehending drunk drivers but tend to be profitable in terms of the number of citations issued. Generally speaking, law enforcement agencies conducing these checkpoints are more likely to find a person whose car registration is out of date or whose driver’s license expired last week than they are to find a drunk driver. As a public safety tool, roadblocks are ineffective and subject to numerous constitutional constraints.

The NTSB further suggested that pleas should be prohibited. This does not make sense at all. Defendants are arraigned and must plead either guilty or not guilty to the court; there is no reasonable way to prohibit defendants from agreeing to plead guilty or no contest in exchange for a set penalty. Prosecutors do not have the resources to take every single case to trial and, frankly, there is no public interest served by requiring this. A conviction is a conviction regardless of how it was obtained.

Fort Lauderdale DUI lawyer William Moore says that getting to the point of a police officer conducting roadside field sobriety tests requires several tests. When a police officer pulls over a driver, he may decide to conduct a DUI investigation based on a variety of different factors that the law enforcement official believes give rise to reasonable suspicion that a crime is being or has been committed. The facts that give rise to this suspicion (if they do in fact support support reasonable suspicion -- a hunch, for instance, is wholly insufficient) may arise before or after the traffic stop takes place, or both. Facts that might lead an officer to conduct an investigation include noticing a vehicle weaving, driving very slowly, failing to maintain a single traffic line, crossing yellow lines, and not obeying traffic laws more generally. Car crashes may also be a factor, especially where only one car is involved. After the officer has already decided to pull over a driver, he or she may also observe other factors indicative of intoxication, such as red, bloodshot, or watery eyes, the odor of alcohol (or marijuana), flushed skin, slurred speech, or other signs. Many police reports contain these specific allegations, notes Fort Lauderdale criminal lawyer Moore.

Upon becoming suspicious that a DUI may be taking place, the officer will usually ask a suspect to comply with field sobriety tests on the side of the road. These tests are voluntary and refusal to participate in the field sobriety tests will not affect your driver’s license. However, refusal to submit may factor into the police officer’s decision to arrest the suspect and may be used against the driver later if a DUI charge is filed. Refusal to submit to breath, urine, or if necessary, blood testing will result in the suspension of the driver’s license, which may be challenged in an administrative hearing before the Florida Department of Motor Vehicles and Highway Safety. In fact, if you have previously refused a BAC test before, the state will likely file a criminal refusal charge, which is a misdemeanor.

Unfortunately, independent studies show that, on the whole, police officers tend to overestimate the number of drivers who are intoxicated, says Broward criminal attorney Moore. One study in particular showed that law enforcement officers who were given a group of people to test and were under the impression that some of them might be under the influence of an intoxicant -- when in reality, none of them were actually intoxicated at all -- documented an alarming number of signs the officers believed indicated that the subjects were in fact intoxicated.

In the state of Florida -- surprisingly -- courts have ruled that it is possible to be arrested and convicted of DUI on a bicycle, says Fort Lauderdale DUI lawyer Moore. There are no precise figures available, but arrests of individuals riding a bike while (allegedly or actually) under the influence of alcohol or other substances are more common than one might imagine.

Implied consent is not applicable for a bicycle DUI. Implied consent refers to the fact that the operation of a motor vehicle -- generally a car -- on the roads in Florida necessarily means that the operator has consented to certain DUI testing when requested by a law enforcement officer, says Fort Lauderdale DUI lawyer Moore. Most often, this means a breathalyzer test.

The relevant section of the Florida statute states that committing a DUI involves a “vehicle,” which has been interpreted very broadly since its enactment A bicycle is not a motor vehicle, but can be taken on the public streets and roadways. There is also a colorable argument that bicycles, sharing the streets with cars, can pose a hazard to the safe flow of traffic and pedestrians if an operator is impaired, according to Broward DUI attorney Moore.

For purposes of driver’s license suspension, the DUI must be in a motor vehicle, such as a car. The courts are split as to whether the typically mandatory driver’s license suspension periods are required when the DUI did not occur on a motor vehicle.

The third District Court of Appeals in the state of Florida dealt with this issue in 1987. The DCA concluded that, based on the statute, the Florida legislature had a broad definition of vehicle in mind when enacting the statute. Interestingly, the Florida Supreme Court has not weighed in on whether a DUI can be committed on a bicycle, and this opinion remains that legal standard as the only appellate opinion on the issue in this state.

A survey of other states shows that they have taken a varied approach. A number of jurisdictions have maintained that a DUI can only be committed on a motor vehicle, which can be more than just a car or truck. For instance, hooking up a lawnmower engine to a living room recliner and driving it around could result in a DUI arrest. Other states include non-motor vehicles, such as bicycles and even individuals who are riding on horseback.