Before I start in on my portrayal of probable cause, in particular as it relates to criminal charges, I want to underscore that this editorial is for informational purposes. If you are charged with a crime or facing criminal charges, please speak to a Seattle criminal attorney for conference on your individual case. Do not rely on this as legal advice, as each situation is so factually different precise guidance is essential.
Probable cause is generally viewed as a mixed issue of law and fact. It requires extensive evidence and a legal conclusion of probable cause. Extensive evidence requires "a sufficient amount of proof in the record to sway a fair-minded, lucid person of the accuracy of the finding." It is the who, what, when, and where of the examination.
For instance, let's suppose we have a guy driving around in Seattle after having drank more than a few drinks. He is pulled over by a cop for speeding - 37 in a 25. He is otherwise driving normally, including pulling off to the side of the highway in a responsible manner. At this time there likely is no probable cause for criminal, although there is probable cause for speeding. But what if when the police officer approaches the driver he notices a robust odor of alcohol and his eyes were watery and bloodshot. This might rise to the level of extensive evidence of DUI.
The subsequent prong of probable cause is whether the facts support a legal finding of probable cause. Basically, do the evidence as known substantiate a logical belief that a crime has been committed. In this case, perhaps so, maybe not (a good Seattle criminal lawyer would be great here). Individuals are permitted to drink and then drive (just not when impaired by liquor), and the watery eyes may be described away by something else.
So, what if the police officer then asks the driver to carry out field sobriety tests (which you are able to and ought to at all times refuse to do in the State of Washington) and he does, failing to touch his finger to his nose, failing to balance on one leg, and failing to meet heel to toe in a walk and turn examination? Is that an adequate amount of for an police officer to draw a sensible conclusion that the driver was driving under the influence of alcohol? In all probability. It is undoubtedly a stronger situation for the police officer (although not definitive - injuries and weather circumstances may have been a factor, for instance).
Now, why is this vital for you, the usual citizen? Because it is critical to appreciate that each time a cop stops you and begins to question you he is not fretful with your safety (excluding in those obvious situations) and is regularly trying to collect sufficient information from you to establish probable cause. And it is even more vital to recognize it is within your Constitutional rights to decline to give him data he will in the end utilize against you (despite the fact that you ought to supply your license, registration, and act courteously to the officer).
If you do find yourself likely to be captured for DUI, speak to the police as little as possible by saying no politely ("I'd respectfully decline to answer that issue") and if things continue to heat up request to have a minute to speak to your Seattle criminal attorney. Even if they get you to say stuff your Seattle DUI attorney will have a good chance of getting it thrown out (you must never waive our rights, for your information).
Related Posts:
How a Good Criminal Attorney Can Help You
Criminal Attorneys Love the Crawford Case
0 comments:
Post a Comment