Before I start my description of probable cause, in particular as it relates to Seattle DUI accusations, I want to stress that this commentary is for educational purposes. If you are charged with a DUI please call a Seattle DUI attorney for conference on your particular case. Do not rely on this as legal counsel, as each set of circumstances is so factually dissimilar individual guidance is essential.
Probable cause is normally viewed as a mixed query of law and fact. It requires sizeable evidence and a legal determination of probable cause. Sizeable evidence requires "a sufficient amount of proof in the record to influence a fair-minded, lucid individual of the legitimacy of the finding." It is the who, what, when, and where of the study.
For example, let's say we have a guy driving around in Seattle subsequent to having consumed several drinks. He is detained by a police officer for speeding - 37 in a 25. He is otherwise driving ordinarily, including pulling off to the side of the street in a responsible manner. At this point there probably is no probable cause for DUI, though there is probable cause for speeding. But what if when the police officer approaches the driver he notices a robust odor of liquor and his eyes were watery and bloodshot. This might climb to the amount of significant substantiation of DUI.
The second element of probable cause is whether the evidence confirm a legal finding of probable cause. In essence, do the evidence as known confirm a practical belief that a crime has been committed. In this situation, maybe so, possibly not. Individuals are allowed 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 perform field sobriety tests (which you are able to and should at all times decline 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 touch heel to toe in a walk and turn analysis? Is that enough for an cop to obtain a practical finding that the driver was driving under the influence of beer? Probably. It is definitely a stronger set of circumstances for the cop (although not authoritative - injuries and weather circumstances may have been a factor, for instance).
Now, why is this significant for you, the common Seattle resident? Because it is important to appreciate that whenever a officer stops you and begins to question you he is not worried with your safety (except in those clear situations) and is ordinarily trying to gather sufficient information from you to establish probable cause. And it is even more important to realize it is within your Constitutional rights to decline to give him data he will in the end use against you (despite the fact that you should supply your license, registration, and act considerately to the police officer).
If you do discover yourself likely to be captured for criminal, chat to the police as little as possible by declining politely ("I'd respectfully refuse to answer that issue") and if things continue to heat up request to have a minute to get in touch with your Seattle DUI attorney. Even if they get you to say things your DUI lawyer will have a good chance of getting it thrown out (you ought to never waive our rights, for your information).
Related Posts:
Why You Need to Know a Good Seattle DUI Attorney
Under the Influence Defined by a Seattle DUI Attorney
