Texas police defend DUI arrest of black man who blew 0.00 on Breathalyzer

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Police in Texas are standing by their drunken driving arrest of a man whose Breathalyzer and blood tests showed no evidence of intoxication.

Larry Davis was arrested Jan. 13, 2013, by Austin police after he ran a stop sign and, according to arresting officers, appeared to be intoxicated during a field sobriety test.

Davis insisted he’d had only one drink and volunteered to provide a blood sample after testing 0.00 on a Breathalyzer – the lowest recordable blood-alcohol content level – and spent a day in jail, reported the Austin Statesman.

Months later, those results also came back negative, and Davis is now trying to have his arrest record cleared, which could take several more months.

But the arresting officer’s supervisor said he still supports the decision to arrest Davis.

“If there is someone who is possibly impaired, we don’t want them driving,” said Cmdr. David Mahoney, of Austin police. “We need to get them off the road, so that was probably (the officer’s) mindset.”

But legal experts say the case shows that drunken driving can sometimes be “an opinion crime,” requiring law enforcement officers to make quick judgment calls on whether a person is intoxicated.

Prosecutors said judgment errors by police helped cause Travis County to have the highest percentage of DUI case dismissals among major Texas counties, according to a 2011 analysis by the Austin Statesman.

Police argue that they cannot take chances with drunken driving suspects in the interest of public safety, although their aggressive enforcement tactics cause about 30 percent of such cases to be dismissed.

However, even for defendants whose cases are dismissed, fighting a drunken driving charge can be costly.

The Texas Department of Transportation used billboards to warn drivers that a DUI charge could cost $17,000 in legal fees and court costs.

While an independent analysis found that claim difficult to verify, a drunken driving charge can certainly cost thousands of dollars to fight and can impede suspects’ ability to work while their case is pending.

Davis, whose case was dismissed last week, was declared indigent at the time of his arrest, and Travis County picked up his legal fees amounting to several hundred dollars.

“I was arrested for nothing, really,” Davis said. “It was suspicion of drunk driving, which I wasn’t so I was surprised and hurt at the same time.”

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/02/26/texas-police-defend-dui-arrest-of-black-man-who-blew-0-00-on-breathalyzer/

Edited February 26, 2014 by Porterhouse

[Harpa Timsah 13,258]

Um, we are not allowed to stereotype Texas on this board. Any criticism is stereotyping. It's been said.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/02/26/texas-police-defend-dui-arrest-of-black-man-who-blew-0-00-on-breathalyzer/

But yet e are not moving towards a police state.

Was that a smurf who arrested him

[Novembro 1,763]

Was that a smurf who arrested him

Violet Beauregarde

[Peikko 1,575]

But yet e are not moving towards a police state.

Was that a smurf who arrested him

Perhaps if you researched the definition of police state you might rethink your post? Suffice to say, the police do sometimes arrest ;people who end up not being booked for a crime, who knew?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Um, we are not allowed to stereotype Texas on this board. Any criticism is stereotyping. It's been said.

Texas? I thought only Vermont was off limits? Bummer.

[TBoneTX 46,220]

Um, we are not allowed to stereotype Texas on this board. Any criticism is stereotyping. It's been said.

"Prosecutors said judgment errors by police helped cause Travis County to have the highest percentage of DUI case dismissals among major Texas counties, according to a 2011 analysis by the Austin Statesman."

The story occurred in Travis County. If the article's claim about the 2011 analysis is true (someone can research it -- the article got the name of the city newspaper wrong), then hammer Travis County and the law enforcement there, and hammer hard.

Edited February 27, 2014 by TBoneTX

[luckytxn 2,265]

We are misunderstood.

Um, we are not allowed to stereotype Texas on this board. Any criticism is stereotyping. It's been said.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

"Prosecutors said judgment errors by police helped cause Travis County to have the highest percentage of DUI case dismissals among major Texas counties, according to a 2011 analysis by the Austin Statesman."

The story occurred in Travis County. If the article's claim about the 2011 analysis is true (someone can research it -- the article got the name of the city newspaper wrong), then hammer Travis County and the law enforcement there, and hammer hard.

Travis high in drunken driving arrests, dismissals

Travis County has dismissed a higher percentage of drunken driving cases than other major Texas counties in part because prosecutors said police filed weak charges or prosecutors let suspects plead to other crimes.

.....

The dismissals come amid what police say is a critical public safety threat, as alcohol contributed to more than half of the city's deadly crashes last year. They said they are trying to combat that trend by aggressively plucking such motorists from the road; on a per capita basis, new drunken driving cases in Travis County roughly doubled those in four other urban counties during the 20-month period.

But prosecutors and defense lawyers say such efforts have at times led to the arrests of drivers who did not appear intoxicated, costing those drivers hours in jail, thousands of dollars in attorneys fees and the social stigma of a DWI arrest.

"Generally speaking, I think if you have alcohol on your breath in Austin, Texas, you are going to jail," said Brian Roark, an Austin defense lawyer and former county prosecutor.

http://www.statesman.com/news/news/special-reports/travis-high-in-drunken-driving-arrests-dismissal-1/nRZ33/

Edited February 27, 2014 by Porterhouse

[Harpa Timsah 13,258]

"Prosecutors said judgment errors by police helped cause Travis County to have the highest percentage of DUI case dismissals among major Texas counties, according to a 2011 analysis by the Austin Statesman."

The story occurred in Travis County. If the article's claim about the 2011 analysis is true (someone can research it -- the article got the name of the city newspaper wrong), then hammer Travis County and the law enforcement there, and hammer hard.

Ah, so you don't live in Travis county?

[Karee 4,191]

Travis County is full of libs. Not surprising the place is run like some kind of police state.

[GandD 5,966]

In KY, thanks in large part to MADD, if you are pulled over, fail a sobriety test or exibit "symptoms" of being drunk or impaired and then blow below .08 on a breathalyzer you can still get a DUI.

[Karee 4,191]

In KY, thanks in large part to MADD, if you are pulled over, fail a sobriety test or exibit "symptoms" of being drunk or impaired and then blow below .08 on a breathalyzer you can still get a DUI.

I went to a (court ordered) class last year and found out that there is no requirement for a certain blood alcohol level to get a conviction. It helps of course. If the cops says you're impaired and you say you're not, there's no legal requirement other than that to prosecute. I believe people have actually been convicted on those ground alone here in the great state of Texas.

Edited February 27, 2014 by Karee

[GandD 5,966]

I went to a (court ordered) class last year and found out that there is no requirement for a certain blood alcohol level to get a conviction. It helps of course. If the cops says you're impaired and you say you're not, there's no legal requirement other than that to prosecute. I believe people have actually been convicted on those ground alone here in the great state of Texas.

How are you gonna argue a law pushed in to effect by a bunch of mothers that may have lost children to drunk drivers? .08 is a joke IMO, I think I can handle driving after 1 tall boy.

[Karee 4,191]

.08 is a joke IMO, I think I can handle driving after 1 tall boy.

So you say. The MADD lobbyists have argued successfully that if you drink 1 beer and get behind the wheel, you'll go out and kill a family of 4.