Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

would you cite

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • stormz5192
    replied
    I'd at least put him in for a re evaluation. In NJ, we can request that the driver be retested via MVC (DMV). In most cases, at least in my area, the would make it a reckless driving with 30 days loss of license.

    Leave a comment:


  • StudChris
    replied
    We have DUI and Wet Reckless, but Wet Reckless isn't something you arrest for it's something that they plea to. I really can't say what I would do without being there, seeing there stability, and checking the eyes. However, 3 jack and cokes over 4 hours WILL NOT put someone as high as a .075.

    Leave a comment:


  • Roastie
    replied
    I would cite and let the courts dismiss it. Due to the extreme nature of the accident and the obvious inability to operate the vehicle, regardless of what he blew I would say not citing him would cause the story to hit the papers and raise some questions from not only your Chief but the cityfolk as well.

    Leave a comment:


  • jthorpe
    replied
    Originally posted by ateamer View Post
    I'd be happy to stand there and say "wow, that looks like a pain to figure out" to another deputy while CHP deals with it.
    hahaha

    Leave a comment:


  • ateamer
    replied
    I'd be happy to stand there and say "wow, that looks like a pain to figure out" to another deputy while CHP deals with it.

    Leave a comment:


  • crass cop
    replied
    yes...we have 2 DUI possibilities, 1- DUI .08 or higher and 2-DUI incapable of driving safely. I would check the "incapable" box

    Leave a comment:


  • GrayPatriot
    replied
    Originally posted by Outshined
    The NYS Troopers around here arrest him, I am not sure what you do.
    This was our guy last night. He passed everything but for his HGN.
    If this went to court I would go on the stand and explain what the divided attention tests were and that he was capable of doing them perfectly yet I still arrested him... Park the car and a lecture is all I will give him.

    I had a guy tell me he had ten beers one time. I am thinking I have a gimme. He passes everything but the HGN. If a person passes their SFSTs I sometimes still put them on the box just to check if my HGN reading is close to the box, which is normally is. Anyway, this guy blew a .10%. I am not bringing him in because I know he will blow over if he can pass my tests...

    Leave a comment:


  • GrayPatriot
    replied
    Originally posted by Outshined
    Well then you can join the ranks of the new officers we are getting. NYS is .08%, you are not doing your job if you don't arrest someone at a .08%. Who cares if the "dudes" in a coma already, you are to arrest people who break the law NYS sets forth. If you do not, you should work at burger king.
    So you get a guy with 4-6 clues on HGN but he passes W+T, OLS, and any other test you choose to give him. You don't feel comfortable letting him drive because you know by his eyes he is up there and he either tells you he has had a significant amount of alcohol, so you put him on the Alcosensor and he blows a .11%. What do you do?

    Leave a comment:


  • Yankee_1
    replied
    no, I wouldnt. I usually dont do anyone below .10 but if accident and above .08 i will. this case no cause he was below .08% the dudes in a coma already.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dinosaur32
    replied
    Outshined is right on here. In NY DWI is squarely on the driver......you're supposed to know if your meds alone or in combo with alchohol can affect your ability to drive. Absolutely possible to blow 0 and still be charged with DWI. And the officer makes the collar....DA has little to do with case untilit gets to court.

    Leave a comment:


  • hooknbook
    replied
    Remember, this is a long form arrest days or weeks after the incident, not a respond to the hospital and cite the guy one hour after the collission type report. You are not taking this guy off the streets...he's already in a coma. Now you have to build a case on him and file it with the DA's office. I'm looking at this more from an investigations view, not necessarily a patrol view.

    Leave a comment:


  • L-1
    replied
    In California you don't cite under those circumstances. Instead, you present the matter to the district attorney's office and they determine whether to file charges. In all likelihood, they would not give you a filing.

    If you were to base it on alcohol alone, the blood alcohol level is below the presumptive level of .08 and is rising rather than falling at a time well after the accident. This indicates the driver was well below the presumptive level at the time of the accident. While anything between .04 and .08 can be a rebuttable (rather than presumptive) DUI in California, most DAs, do not file on anything below .08 as a matter of course.

    If you were to look at DUI based on his meds, or a combination of his meds and alcohol, again, I doubt any of our DAs would give you a filing if you included info about the seizures and head injuries and statements from the doctor's indicating they could have caused the accident.

    In short, I would have written the report as a misdemeanor DUI on private property, submitted it to the DA and not have been surprised if it was rejected for prosecution.

    At the same time, you have to remember that we have more crimes out here than our courts can handle and than our DAs can prosecute. In many counties, a filing DA's performance report is based (in part) on the percentage of complaints he files that actually wind up in convictions. Under the circumstances, if there is a potential for a reasonable doubt loss, you won't get a filing, even if it's obvious the bad guy is guilty.

    Leave a comment:


  • wirefire2
    replied
    He would get a DUI. Even though he wasn't over the limit, he was still clearly impaired and was obviously mixing meds with alcohol.

    Leave a comment:


  • metrovegas2
    replied
    Originally posted by Outshined
    Sometimes we lose, but we do our best to take the bad guys off the street. Seizure or not he was DRINKING, and taking MEDICATION, he should not have been driving. And, the bottom line is if he has seizures he would not have a license to drive here.



    Exactly.....I could care less if he doesn't end up getting convicted, so long as he didn't kill anyone that night and he got to spend a few hours behind bars. Plus all of the costs that are involved for him should be a big deterrent not to do it again (car impound, bail, attorney, etc)

    Leave a comment:


  • jthorpe
    replied
    I would do the investigation like normal and put contributing circumstances of alcohol use and whatever else was appropriate. I would subpoena the hospital blood results as soon as possible and consult the DA's office on how to proceed.

    If I had a chance to do SFST's, there might be something there such as nystagmus that could help me make that determination. Nystagmus and alco-sensor readings would be important IMO, even if I can't use the alco-sensor reading in court other than to say it showed a positive result.

    That's a tough one. It might get ripped apart here too. I'd also be talking to my Sgt.

    Leave a comment:

MR300x250 Tablet

Collapse

What's Going On

Collapse

There are currently 6242 users online. 346 members and 5896 guests.

Most users ever online was 26,947 at 08:36 PM on 12-29-2019.

Welcome Ad

Collapse
Working...
X