Being arrested for DUI could make you keep worrying about the result of your case. Perhaps you didn't pass the breathalyzer test. Many people believe that the result of the test will demonstrate your guilt once on trial, yet this isn't the case all of the time. DUI attorneys could make several arguments to have the evidence inadmissible or to make it seem less potent.
One argument your lawyer can make is the results of the breathalyzer were skewed due to a pre-existing medical condition that you have. A breathalyzer test measures alcohol levels in your breath, but this exam isn't always flawless. It may not have the ability to get rid of other substances that may test positive during a breath analyzer test. Diabetes, a dietary ailment called ketosis, and acid reflux disease could all affect the results of a breath analyzer and render it incorrect.
Your attorney can also argue that the police officer who administered a breathalyzer did not follow standard protocol. States and even police departments follow different protocols. Some protocols that must be followed include administering the exam at the correct time so results will not be affected by presence of residual alcohol or making sure that the testing area is free from any form or radio frequency disturbance. Even a mobile phone can already cause radio frequency interference making the outcomes unreliable.
A third basis that a DUI lawyer can utilize to argue that the results of a breathalyzer test are inadmissible is that the arresting officer didn't truly obtain the subject's approval just before he got the test. Law enforcement officials must explain to people who are stopped for drunk driving that they could refuse to take the breathalyzer test. An officer who forces a person to take the test or informs the individual that penalties will be nastier if he or she doesn't take the examination may be breaking due process. In this case, the judge might not recognize the results of the breathalyzer test as an evidence during trial.
It's also possible for the attorney to state there wasn't any probable cause for the policeman to halt the individual. The United States Supreme Court case law merely permits police officers to stop a vehicle when there is probable cause. This means that a sensible person would believe that the people in the car are committing an infringement. If there wasn't any probable cause to halt the vehicle, any evidence obtained from that stop would be inadmissible. The outcomes of the breathalyzer test are included in these evidences. If your lawyer could successfully convince a judge that no probable cause existed to pull you over, the court will not include the results of the breathalyzer test from trial.
One argument your lawyer can make is the results of the breathalyzer were skewed due to a pre-existing medical condition that you have. A breathalyzer test measures alcohol levels in your breath, but this exam isn't always flawless. It may not have the ability to get rid of other substances that may test positive during a breath analyzer test. Diabetes, a dietary ailment called ketosis, and acid reflux disease could all affect the results of a breath analyzer and render it incorrect.
Your attorney can also argue that the police officer who administered a breathalyzer did not follow standard protocol. States and even police departments follow different protocols. Some protocols that must be followed include administering the exam at the correct time so results will not be affected by presence of residual alcohol or making sure that the testing area is free from any form or radio frequency disturbance. Even a mobile phone can already cause radio frequency interference making the outcomes unreliable.
A third basis that a DUI lawyer can utilize to argue that the results of a breathalyzer test are inadmissible is that the arresting officer didn't truly obtain the subject's approval just before he got the test. Law enforcement officials must explain to people who are stopped for drunk driving that they could refuse to take the breathalyzer test. An officer who forces a person to take the test or informs the individual that penalties will be nastier if he or she doesn't take the examination may be breaking due process. In this case, the judge might not recognize the results of the breathalyzer test as an evidence during trial.
It's also possible for the attorney to state there wasn't any probable cause for the policeman to halt the individual. The United States Supreme Court case law merely permits police officers to stop a vehicle when there is probable cause. This means that a sensible person would believe that the people in the car are committing an infringement. If there wasn't any probable cause to halt the vehicle, any evidence obtained from that stop would be inadmissible. The outcomes of the breathalyzer test are included in these evidences. If your lawyer could successfully convince a judge that no probable cause existed to pull you over, the court will not include the results of the breathalyzer test from trial.
About the Author:
If you need the best Orlando DUI lawyers, then check out this DUI attorney for your needs.
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire