What Happens When Police Officers Ignore Protocol During DUI Arrest?
By Clark Adams | Published on July 28, 2011 | 0 Comments
When people are pulled over for a DUI, and commanded to submit to breathalyzer tests and questioning by officers, few of them are thinking clearly enough to keep track of everything the police are saying, and whether what they’re doing is legal. But according to Clark Adams, Attorney at Law, a DUI lawyer in Columbus, GA, there are rights every officer is required to read. If those rights aren’t proclaimed, then chemical tests for breath, blood, or urine, are inadmissible.
The Columbus, GA, DUI lawyer offers a little background information: If officers arrest somebody for driving under the influence of alcohol, they can’t simply jump right into the tests. First, the officers have to advise the arrested parties of their implied consent rights. The warning is incredibly lengthy, but Georgia law requires the officers to read the entire warning. The officers have to read all the rights AT THE TIME OF ARREST where they’re handcuffing the accused; they can’t wait until they get to the station.
The consent warning is an entire speech about what is required of the subject and what happens if the subject—the accused—refuses the tests. But somewhere deep in that warning is a section about the rights of entitlement to independent tests. In fact, if police officers do not advise the accused about every detail of their rights—including this huge section about third-party tests—at the time of arrest, every test they perform is inadmissible, and its results are void—regardless how damning. By “inadmissible,” the Columbus, GA, DUI lawyer means that the judge won’t be able to use the test results in a hearing or in court; because the conditions under which they were obtained were inadmissible—literally, not allowed to happen. That also means that the jury would never hear the results of this test.
The officers’ test results would be admissible; however, if they had read the accused all their rights on the scene, and given them the option to get the independent tests done at a nearby hospital.
So, a client might end up in court, facing the judge, pleading not-guilty for DUI charges not on the premise of sobriety, but on the premise that the officers did not honor legally binding protocol during the arrest. The argument would be that whatever the accusations, they are null and void, because the test result is “inadmissible,” and therefore unfit for any audience.
One would think that this information serves as a warning for law enforcement. But really, in the view of a DUI lawyer in Columbus, GA, this information serves as a warning for drivers: You always deserve to hear your rights—not later, but sooner; as soon as you are arrested, you deserve to hear all your legal options accorded you by the law.
*Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only. You should not rely on this article as a legal opinion on any specific facts or circumstances, and you should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Publication of this article and your receipt of this article does not create an attorney-client relationship.