http://www.ByeByeDWI.com

Please note-this is an example of the disposition of a recent New Hampshire DWI case. It is by no means a guarantee of any particular result in any other case.

http://www.byebyedwi.blogspot.com

BASIC FACTS: The driver in this case was arrested after A police officer made the usual police observations from the government-sponsored DWI arrest manuals: bloodshot and glassy eyes, “a distinct odor of alcohol”, and an admission of drinking alcohol.  The officer also asked the driver to perform the series of sidewalk gymnastics known as “field sobriety tests”.  The driver chose to agree to play the lead in this predictable roadside ritual.

The driver allegedly “failed” the usual three sidewalk maneuvers: the “follow the pen” or “horizontal gaze nystagmus” (“HGN”) exercise, the “nine step walk and turn test” (sometimes called the “heel to toe test”), and the “one leg stand test”.  This driver’s performance was unremarkable on these “field sobriety tests”.   After the one-leg stand ordeal was over, the officer asked the driver to blow into a small hand-held battery operated gizmo called a Preliminary Breath tester, or “PBT”.  The driver blew into the gadget, which said she blew a .14, a result which can also be attained by rinsing your mouth out with mouthwash shortly before the event.  The officer arrested the driver and charged her with “driving while intoxicated”, commonly known as “DWI”, and alternatively called “DUI” or “OUI”.

The driver was handcuffed and put in the back of a police cruiser.  The officer got the driver out of the car at the police station and brought her inside.  Inside the station, the officer asked the driver to blow into a black hose to give a “breath sample”.  The driver chose to give the state “evidence” against herself and she blew into the black hose twice.  The breath test was not captured on video tape. 

The old gray breath testing box at the police station said the driver’s “breath alcohol concentration” was .10.

Because she chose to help the state gather evidence against himself, the driver was then treated to second criminal charge, commonly called a “DWI per se” charge, for allegedly driving with a breath alcohol concentration over .02.  .02 is the level at which a driver under 21 years of age can be convicted of the crime of DWI in New Hampshire.

The driver then received a letter from the New Hampshire Department of Safety advising her that her license would be suspended for allegedly failing the breath test.  The driver hired Attorney Stevens to challenge the administrative license suspension at a hearing at the Department of Safety. 

HEARING PROCEDURE:            Attorney Stevens requested a hearing on the driver’s behalf at the Department of Safety.  Attorney Stevens challenged everything that the law and the rules allow regarding the breath test.  After the state presented its case, Attorney Stevens moved to dismiss this suspension.  Attorney Stevens’ motion to dismiss the suspension was granted based on the state’s failure to comply with the administrative rules required when a driver elects to blow into the breath testing hose.  The driver’s administrative license suspension was dismissed after the hearing.

RESULT:      ADMINISTRATIVE LICENSE SUSPENSION DISMISSED!!!   The driver’s right to drive pending trial was restored immediately.  She did not suffer the 180 day administrative suspension that the state sought to impose on him.

Attorney Stevens thanks God for this successful defense!!!

TODAY’S SCRIPTURE:

“We are assured and know that all things work together and are fitting into a plan for good to and for those who love God and are called according to His design and purpose.”

Romans 8:28

Contact Information:
If you leave a voice message or send an email, please include ONLY the following information:

• Date of any alleged offense you have been charged with.
• The court in which you have been told to appear.
• The date and time you have been told to appear.
• Your telephone number and the best time to reach you.

Information in this column should not be construed as legal advice and does not constitute an engagement of the Mark Stevens Law Office, nor any attorney associated with the Mark Stevens Law Office. The information contained herein is of a general nature and may not apply to any particular set of facts and circumstances. Please bear in mind that laws change frequently. We will make an effort to update the information on a regular basis, but are under no obligation to do so. No part of this document, nor any information contained in this website, may be disseminated without this paragraph. This may be considered legal advertising.