It doesn't matter how good your DUI attorney does at picking apart the police officers' testimony and the chemical evidence. If the state introduces your arrest statements that you made into evidence, this makes you look guilty. You will need strategies for using issues surrounding your DUI arrest statements to police officers.
Arrest statements and the overall issues
Fortunately for those accused of DUI, the law provides that any statement that the police say you made will not be admitted into evidence against you unless they can show that it was made voluntarily. This means that it was not the result of force, threats or coercion.
It is extremely important for you to tell your DUI lawyer everything that you remember saying right from the beginning. The reality is that most DUI arrests are not audio or video recorded. After arrest, police officers rely on police reports to remember statements, typically case goes to trial months or years later. However, certain things at trial may trigger memories of things that you said that are not in the report. There's always the chance that police officers might make something up or think you said something when really somebody else.
Challenging voluntary statements
When a DUI lawyer is evaluating whether to challenge the voluntarism of your DUI arrest statements, the statements require evaluation. For example, if stated your drinking, or admitted to driving and causing an accident. Your lawyer tries to get these arrest statements, thrown out of court. However, if a statement is helpful to your defense, there is no reason to challenge its admissibility.
The objection to the voluntarism of any statement attributed to you is something that the trial judge must rule on if made, before the statement is brought up in DUI court. Although this motion is technically outside the hearing of a jury. There is one potential advantage gained from this issue in front of a jury.
A good DUI lawyer has been known to lay a foundation that proves voluntarism for the cops while defending DUI clients. Why would any good DUI lawyer want to do such a thing? It can go something like the following:
Advantage of questioning voluntarism
DUI Lawyer: You arrested my client because you thought you had probable cause to believe he was under the influence of alcohol?
Arresting Officer: Correct.
DUI Lawyer: And we've already established that the first thing to go when somebody becomes impaired by alcohol is that person's judgment?
Arresting Officer: Correct.
DUI Lawyer: Now eventually, you asked my client a series of questions following his arrest, right?
Arresting Officer: Yes.
DUI Lawyer: And in your opinion did my client's condition change in any noticeable way from the time you arrested him to the time you asked him questions, 20 minutes later? By this I mean did he seem any more or less sober to you when you asked him the questions than he did at the time you pulled him over and arrested him?
Arresting Officer: Nope. He was about the same, I guess.
DUI Lawyer: Now you are an experienced DUI officer, and you remember your training about suspect interrogation and questioning, right?
Arresting Officer: Yes.
Questions continue to evaluate impairment
DUI Lawyer: Your taught that in order to ask a suspect questions after arrest you must read them Miranda.
Arresting Officer: Yes.
DUI Lawyer: And your taught that in order for the suspect's answers to be admissible into evidence, that suspect must understand his rights, and be able to knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently waive them, right?
Arresting Officer: Yes.
DUI Lawyer: And you also understand that the answers can't be the result of force, threats or coercion, right?
Arresting Officer: Right.
DUI Lawyer: And since you did read him Miranda, and you accepted his answers, I assume you felt that he had the capacity to understand his important legal rights, correct?
Arresting Officer: Yes, I believe he understood.
DUI Lawyer: And you felt that he had the ability to exercise good judgment and make a knowing, voluntary and intelligent decision about answering your questions.
Arresting Officer: Absolutely.
Overview of above method
After the officer answered "absolutely" above, the DUI lawyer has ability to argue to jury your judgment not impaired. At least the officer didn't think so because they asked you the questions and used them in court.
This method is especially effective if the answers you gave are helpful to your case.
If the answers are harmful, then your DUI lawyer will want to do everything possible to keep a jury from hearing about them.
As always, check with your local DUI attorney to determine whether bringing a motion to suppress statements that you made involuntarily is right for your case.
Related Articles
Trial DUI Evidence and the Objections its Affect - It is important to understand what the trial DUI evidence and the appropriate objections has on a trial. The following outlines how the trial DUI is evidence is applied and how objections are noted.
DUI Breath Test Reliability and Conditions - If you've submitted to a DUI breath test, share all of the facts and circumstances with your attorney to check the reliability of the test.
Violations of Miranda Rights In DUI Cases - Learn how Miranda warnings work in DUI cases. Everybody has heard the term Miranda and most people are familiar with the following: