There is no such thing as “legal” intoxication behind the wheel.

AZ has Driving While Impaired and Driving Under the Influence.
DWI consists of "impairment to the slightest degree". Encompasses everything from Benadryl to heroin or alcohol.
People typically get tripped up when asked, "On a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being a slight buzz and 10 being totally drunk, where are you?"
Of course many people say "1". Congrats, you just confessed to DWI. (correct answer is "0")


ETA: If I'm out somewhere, don't have a designated driver and have a beer, I'll look at my watch.
If asked, I can say "Yes, I had one 12oz beer with food at 1850." Beats the hell out of "I don't know" and the near universal answer "2 beers". I will NOT drive with a buzz...ever.

Our standard in AZ is "impaired to the slightest degree". So while a driver may be "under the limit", impairment can still result in an arrest. Impairment is determined by observations of the driving, interview of the driver, standardized field tests (FST), the driver being able to follow directions, odor of alcohol, demeanor, manual dexterity, Horizontal Gauze Nystagmus (HGN) and a breath or blood test.

I worked a DUI task force for 3 years. My total DUI arrests over my 26+ years was 2,000+ DUI drivers. I went to trial on 8 cases, one driver I arrested twice in the same night. Two were found not guilty. I was the first AZ officer to be certified in HGN. I was trained by the LAPD Motor Sgt. who realized the correlation between HGN and impairment. It was verified by the Southern California Research Institute (SCRI).

If I stopped a driver that displayed driving that I could contribute to alcohol intoxication, the driver was arrested and processed and 99% of the time released to a responsible party. If no one could take immediate custody of the vehicle, our policy was to tow it. I went into another assignment by the time Drug Recognition (DRE) became another indicator/tool.

"On a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being a slight buzz and 10 being totally drunk, where are you?" I devised that question while I was on the DUI team. No one else was using it.

Another officer (my mentor) on the team arrested 3,000+ DUI drivers in his 30+ year career. AHP300 was a legend on AZ highways.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: az4783054,

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:
There is no such thing as “legal” intoxication behind the wheel.

100% agreed, and it irks me to no end the people who think it's okay!

If I've had even one small drink after a long day, and suddenly the wife and daughter want to go out to eat somewhere, I insist one of them drive and not me! Same goes if I've had to take a Rx pain pill... no driving!!!

quote:

Originally posted by George43:
In Texas the max BAC if carrying is 0,0.

Would you like the clarify this with a specific law, please?

The HGN test I'd probably pass okay if tested while 100% sober. Some of the other things I've heard/seen like walking a straight line, touching your nose with your eyes closed, or saying the alphabet backwards... I'd fail all of those.

I couldn't say the alphabet backwards if I tried. With my frequent vertigo, walking a straight line is something I can rarely do well, and touching my nose.... well, I just ain't THAT coordinated! LOL

I just hope I never get pulled and have to undergo those tests to find out!

The DWI lawyers all say not to take any tests.
They are ALL rigged to convict you.

quote:

Originally posted by bronicabill:
The HGN test I'd probably pass okay if tested while 100% sober. Some of the other things I've heard/seen like walking a straight line, touching your nose with your eyes closed, or saying the alphabet backwards... I'd fail all of those.

I couldn't say the alphabet backwards if I tried. With my frequent vertigo, walking a straight line is something I can rarely do well, and touching my nose.... well, I just ain't THAT coordinated! LOL

I just hope I never get pulled and have to undergo those tests to find out!

Prior to Standardized Field Testing (designed by SCRI) being adopted by most states and recommended by NHTSA, impairment was determined by unscientific tests.

Saying the alphabet backwards is not a standard FST. It's not just one test that determines impairment, it's a combination of factors and the officers training and observations.

HGN is used by the medical profession. I worked a check point where a driver was being arrested by another agency. The FST indicated some impairment but he insisted he had not been drinking. My observations confirmed that. HGN indicated a possible neurological issue (SCRI called it standing nystagmus). In fact, he had a past traumatic brain injury from a motorcycle collision. The other agency released him based on my recommendation.

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:
The DWI lawyers all say not to take any tests.
They are ALL rigged to convict you.

And that will ensure you get hauled off to jail (at least to the precinct for testing), even if 100% sober! So what's a person to do???

quote:

Originally posted by bronicabill:

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:
The DWI lawyers all say not to take any tests.
They are ALL rigged to convict you.

And that will ensure you get hauled off to jail (at least to the precinct for testing), even if 100% sober! So what's a person to do???

Perhaps, but not taking a test is equivalent to your right to remain silent - at least in as much as any test could possible lead to your conviction.
These "tests" are not standardized facts so results can easily be misinterpreted and usually are - in favor against you.
What to do ? - just call your lawyer if you get hauled in.
Not a lot of good options any way you go.

Take the test, don’t take the test. People get convicted Day in and out at trial not taking the test.

I laugh when I hear people say that attorneys tell them to not take the test. Either way, refusal leaves you without a license for a year. The reason I laugh is people say lawyers tell them to not take any tests, they still get convicted AND they lose their license for a year.

Jailhouse legal advice is the best!

It’s amazing that 100 percent of the time I don’t drink and get behind the wheel. And by golly, I have yet to get a DUI. Must be a hard concept for some. I never have to worry about refusing, the test being rigged, calling an attorney.......nothing.

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:

quote:

Originally posted by George43:
In Texas the max BAC if carrying is 0,0.

Would you like the clarify this with a specific law, please?

Fact? given to me at CC class.

What are Chronic Pain pts supposed to do? Stop driving? I would bet that most, on their regular dosage, which might incapacitate most, would not be impaired. However, what should they say when asked if,, have you taken any medication today? And I would think most carry some with them in case they have some breakthrough pain.
The fact they are on meds would probably affect their HGN. Their in a pickle.

quote:

Originally posted by George43:

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:

quote:

Originally posted by George43:
In Texas the max BAC if carrying is 0,0.

Would you like the clarify this with a specific law, please?

Fact? given to me at CC class.

I agree it may be a great idea but as far as I can tell (not a lawyer) it is only a law (misdemeanor) to carry concealed or opening in Texas a HANDGUN (does not include a long gun)while being INTOXICATED.

Not a fact or a law of 0.0% but certainly a great idea and of course would not likely lead to a conviction of such.

Snippet from TXDP FAQ

quote:

Can I carry a handgun if I am drinking alcohol?

“Carrying” while drinking is not prohibited, but it is a criminal offense to carry while intoxicated.
(Intoxicated is not the same as limits for DWI.
Currently there is NO MINIMUM LIMIT for intoxication under CHL law)

As George Carlin used to say, "if you're legally drunk, what's the problem?" Your legal.

Go ahead, refuse to take any tests. Refuse to make any statements. A telephonic search warrant from a Superior Court judge takes minutes. Then a licensed phlebotomist draws your blood sample, with or without your consent. If there is a significant delay, the BAC at the time of arrest can be determined by rate of elimination. FST and breath test refusal almost always guarantees a nights stay in jail. And you will probably lose your operators license to mandatory suspension, face insurance increases, etc.

If a state allows a driver to elect a blood test instead of a breath test, take it. Blood analysis is more accurate than breath. Note that the results of the blood test may be used as evidence.

Or cooperate, get a defense attorney and take the case to court (about $10,000 is the going rate for a trial).

Prescribed medications that may impair driving are always marked with warnings that they may cause impairment. Impairment is impairment. Prescribed medications may not readily be identified by HGN depending on the medication, but a DRE can identify them by category. A DRE must follow a multiple step evaluation process to determine the category of drugs in a persons system. Blood tests can support the DRE evaluation.

quote:

Originally posted by Sigfest:
What are Chronic Pain pts supposed to do? Stop driving? I would bet that most, on their regular dosage, which might incapacitate most, would not be impaired. However, what should they say when asked if,, have you taken any medication today? And I would think most carry some with them in case they have some breakthrough pain.
The fact they are on meds would probably affect their HGN. Their in a pickle.

Ummm yeah, if they are impaired, they should just stop driving.

I don’t get why people seem to feel entitled to put others at risk when they shouldn’t be behind the wheel.

Does any agency in AZ even use breath tests anymore?
I thought everyone switched to blood tests over the court ruling that defense attys used over proprietary software in the breathalyzers and their lack of access to it.

I am retired now, but the trend has been moving towards blood testing over breath testing. Grants have allowed agencies to have officers certified to be phlebotomists.

To the best of my knowledge, AZDPS uses the INTOXILYZER 8000. In AZ it is one of the few if not the only breath testing device that is admissible in court. Breath testing devices are expensive to purchase and expensive to maintain. They have to be checked for calibration on a regular basis. An abnormality may result in the machine being removed from service. In AZ, many agencies use AZDPS machines at no expense and the DPS lab maintains them.

Remote areas may not have access to a phlebotomist, or nearby hospital. So breath testing may still be the only option. If I was still working I'd have no issue with a blood test requirement. DUI drivers like to play games with the machines. Not so with blood.

I admit to drinking a bit of alcohol. I used to waste money in bars when I was younger and I would bet at least 50% of the folks driving home were not legal to do so. No matter the situation, if I am drinking any at all, the car keys are put away. It's just not worth the risk to me. Way too much money in the toilet if you are caught, or worse. Mostly, I don't want to make a mistake that causes others injury. Driving safely in Northern Virginia is tough enough sober, let alone even just slightly impaired....