How Leckerman Law Will Help
Defend Your DWI / DUI Charges

Recently, I had the pleasure of representing a seasonal police officer who worked for one of the New Jersey shore towns. He was a very nice guy with a concerned family in his corner and a spotless record. For the purposes of this article, he will be referred to as “Tom.”

When Tom initially contacted me, he was extremely upset and fearful of losing his license and career as a police officer, because he had been accused of a DWI. On its face, the case seemed like a bad one. Tom had driven his truck over a curb and into a house with the owner inside. Fortunately, the owner of the home was not injured, but part of the house was destroyed. The police conducted an investigation for a suspected DUI. Tom failed three field sobriety tests. The police took Tom back to the station and did breath testing. The result was .26% blood alcohol concentration (BAC) – three times the legal limit.

Tom assured me that he drank only a few beers over a period of a couple of hours and that there was no way he was intoxicated or had a .26% BAC. Yet, under the circumstances, Tom felt that he had no chance of being exonerated. He was hoping to simply get his license suspension, which stood at 7-12 months if convicted of the DWI, down to 90-days.

I assured Tom, although the case seemed like a tough one to win, even the worst cases have ended in victory. I would start my own investigation into the matter and begin thoroughly exploring the way the police did their investigation and breath testing.

After months of research, I was able to determine that there were major discrepancies in the case. The reports of the two officers who did the investigation were deficient in crucial ways. The first officer on the scene noted nothing about suspecting Tom of drunk driving. The second officer on the scene started the DWI investigation simply because a serious accident occurred and because Tom was leaning on the side of his truck. That was the sum of their initial suspicion of drunk driving.

Neither officer bothered to examine the interior of the truck that Tom was driving to see if he hit his head during the impact. Nonetheless, it turned out that there was evidence Tom hit his head on the windshield during the accident. The window had an impact mark on the driver’s side that resembled a spider’s web. This is a classic sign of a head impact. The result of such an impact would have certainly left Tom disoriented and unbalanced immediately after the accident.

The police neglected to take this circumstance into consideration when asking Tom to perform field sobriety tests. These tests involved balance. Certainly, the accident itself and potential injury to Tom could have affected his ability to do balance tests.

Moreover, Tom did not exhibit typical signs of intoxication. His speech was fine. He did not have fumbling hand movements. He did not stagger while walking. The major observations that police noted were that he talked slowly and moved slowly. Of course, these behaviors would also be typical following a major accident with potential head injury.

At this point, the results of the field sobriety tests were in certain doubt. However, I still had to find out why the accident occurred. Well, it turned out that that it there was dense fog and mist on the night of the accident. Both the weather reports and pictures from the accident investigation revealed as much. This accident happened at a “Y” intersection. Due to the weather, Tom could not see the stop sign or the turn in the road. That explained why he kept driving straight through the intersection and over the curb.

The second officer claimed in his reports that the weather was clear and dry. Yet, his partner wrote that the weather was foggy and misty. This discrepancy would certainly prove useful at trial.

Finally, a thorough examination of the breath testing device records revealed that the device had not been working properly. Additionally, I was able to retain an expert who would testify about the faulty device at trial. At trial, the prosecutor conceded that he would not be able to enter the results of the breath testing into evidence. Without the breath results, the State’s case was considerably weaker. The testimony of the police officers could simply not stand with all of the contradictory information that was uncovered.

As the trial proceeded, all of the discrepancies in the case were revealed. Ultimately, the judge found that the evidence was insufficient. Tom was not guilty of DWI. Needless to say, Tom and his family were relieved and ecstatic about the result. Now, Tom would be able to pursue his career and help the community.

VINELAND, New Jersey – Anderson Sotomayor, a forty-five year old Southern New Jersey man, who was charged five times with drunken driving within five weeks, was released on bail for a separate drug charge.

His driving record includes two prior convictions for DWI in 1989 and 1992.  Additionally, the man’s license was suspended 23 times by the Motor Vehicle Commission.

In the State of New Jersey, a person with a blood alcohol content of 0.08% or greater, who operates a motor vehicle or a boat, is considered to be driving while intoxicated (DWI) and can face penalties ranging up to 20-years license suspension, hefty fines, and surcharges along with community service and six months of jail time.

In recent years, arrests have been on the rise for drivers suspected of being under the influence of prescription drugs. These arrests often involve people who are lawfully taking medications, which have no intoxicating effects on driving skills. Unfortunately, an arrest for an alleged drug-related DUI/DWI can have tremendous financial and personal consequences for the accused. Fortunately, there are many ways to fight this type of DUI charge.

In a prescription drug DUI investigation, the police will often utilize drug recognition evaluations (DREs) and blood or urine tests to try to prove the charge. These officers typically have little to no formal education concerning how drugs affect the human body. Moreover, the officer usually has no information concerning the driver’s medical history. At best, an officer has a checklist of symptoms he follows in order to come to a conclusion that the driver is impaired by drugs.

A knowledgeable DUI defense attorney will be able to damage a police officer’s credibility on these points.

An expert in pharmacology is realistically the only suitable witness who can give an opinion about a driver’s intoxication due to prescription drugs. In order for a pharmacologist to render an opinion about a prescription drug DWI, a number of factors must be known. First, the expert must know the medical history of the driver.

This includes when a drug was prescribed, why it was prescribed, how often the driver takes the medication, and how long the driver has been taking the medication. Second, the expert must know when the last dose of the drug was taken. Third, the expert must know what behaviors were exhibited by the driver during the police investigation. Lastly, the expert needs to know what were the results of any blood or urine tests.

Any competent pharmacologist will agree that, without all of this information, it is difficult, if not impossible, to state that a driver was DWI.

Lab results alone do not tell an accurate tale of whether a driver was DUI. The mere presence of a prescription drug in a driver’s blood or urine only shows that the person took the drug sometime recently. In fact, if a person has been taking a prescription drug on a regular, prescribed basis, then the drug should be detected during a blood or urine test. Unusually high amounts of the drug in a driver’s system may show intoxication, but the prosecution needs to have an expert witness properly explain that the amount of the drug caused the driver to be DWI.

Finally, crime labs are not infallible. Mistakes in testing are made for a number of reasons.

Evidence samples can be improperly labeled. Preparation of evidence samples can be mishandled. Technicians running the tests may forget to do every step in the testing process, which would jeopardize the results. Misinterpretation of the testing results may occur as well.

Lawyers representing clients charged with prescription drug DUIs should have extensive training and experience concerning drug testing. These lawyers will know what type of information must be obtained from the lab and how to analyze that information in order to properly attack the government’s case.

Call Leckerman Law now to discuss how your case can be defended.