.jpg)
8.07.2009
To Get Me Off The Top Post
The Fort Worth Court of Appeals handed down an opinion today in a DWI related Wise County case. Guy gets stopped by a trooper, given a citation for speeding, and let go. Five minutes later he is stopped by another trooper for speeding. This trooper smells alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and the driver being "unsteady" on his feet. He is asked to perform field sobriety tests and the defendant refuses. Issue: Was there probably cause to arrest the guy for DWI? Answer: Yes (the answer always seems to be "yes".)
Opinion. (PDF)
(It's really boring)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
I'm assuming you posted this because of the fact that the first cop didn't catch the fact that he was drunk?
Was there probable cause to arrest him? Uh....absolutely.
Ask victims of drunk drivers that question.
In fact....the first trooper needs to be investigated for not administering a field sobriety test.
Nope, I'm going back to the goofy picture.
I'll drink to that
Was alcohol involved ?
BG, would you consider any arrest for DWI to be warranted or are the drivers always wrongfully accused.
Why is this so important to you Barry?
Are you keeping this for a future DWI case?
Likely.
The first stop has nothing to do with the second stop. Defendants father must have reasoned that 180 day suspension is better than the alternative DWI conviction and advised his son to act in the manner he did on the second stop. He was probably hoping for two Judge Dauphinot misguided opinions. Oh by the way see 6:08 comment. Very interesting considering an upcoming DWI trial!!!
Interesting that Mier voted for this since he has a DWI on his record.
Nope, Boring...............Back to the ballet dancer below!
Anyone who has drunk and then drives should be stopped and arrested. Um, I'm thinking there is some LAW about that, right?
The first officer stopped him for speeding, gives the guy a ticket and sends him on his way.
Did the second officer know that he had just been pulled over and ticketed for the same thing? If so then maybe he took a closer look at the guy and noticed the slight signs the guy had been drinking.
My true question is had the man truely been drinking? Did the officers really smell alcohol along with the other signs?
You got to love these inbred types from Wise County. I know this guy and the story.
He was coming home from the Republican meeting (held by the womans committee)and they stopped by Frilly's to discuss how Obammy has ruined the American way of life.
And the next thing you know they stopped him on his way home (he lives in a double wide I think in Chico.)
And NO MATTER how many times he claimed that he knew one of our Red Neck County Leaders. They still arrested him for being an alcoholic and a moron.
The End
Lest some of you are unaware, it is NOT illegal to drive after drinking. It is illegal to drive while intoxicated. Intoxicated has a specific legal definition. Did this person meet that legal definition?
Judge Dauphinot missed the point again, go figure!
Post a Comment