Ken Stabler

[sntemp 0]

The penalty for first refusal is 90 day suspension. If you do end of found guilty of the DUI you're probably going to lose your license for 90 days anyway.

Many people with a BAC of .10 can still do all the field sobriety things so they won't look like the overly intoxicated fools you often see on these TV shows. However if you blow a .10 you've taken all doubt out of it.

[runswithscissors 33]

"sntemp: that is some VERY dangerous advice you are suggesting. who is a judge going to believe, you, or the officer that arrested you, the officer in intake that booked you, and the dash camera and audio recording from the patrol car? sure, you can't be forced to test but you are digging yourself a HUGE hole by doing that, as a refusal is extremely tough/nearly impossible to beat and you will get harsher penalties when you are found guilty."

Again, I don't drink and drive but for a couple reasons I know that the advice I am giving is in no way dangerous.

And that is IF you are found guilty not WHEN. Without BAC you've taking the biggest piece of evidence from the prosecutions hands and now made it about subjective testimony and that can be beat in a court. Kind of hard to beat a breath test.

i deal with it on a daily basis, i work at a police department. by refusing you are only putting yourself in a bad position with a judge, because you have a way of proving that you are not drunk by taking a PBT or other methods of tests. the reason penalties are harsher for a per se refusal are for that very reason. you may think you are taking the "biggest piece of evidence" from the prosecution, but you are a fool if you rely on that in court. why do you think refusal penalties are so much more steep than a regular DUI? a refusal is an AUTOMATIC suspension of your DL also, no waiting on the court case, no ifs ands or buts such as would be with a DUI. i'm telling you, the advice you are giving is dangerous. if anybody follows it they are crazy. also, an officer is not required to give you a field sobriety test. a PBT will suffice, and a refusal of a PBT will also suffice if the officer feels you are unable to safely drive the vehicle.

[sntemp 0]

"

i deal with it on a daily basis, i work at a police department. by refusing you are only putting yourself in a bad position with a judge, because you have a way of proving that you are not drunk by taking a PBT or other methods of tests. the reason penalties are harsher for a per se refusal are for that very reason. you may think you are taking the "biggest piece of evidence" from the prosecution, but you are a fool if you rely on that in court. why do you think refusal penalties are so much more steep than a regular DUI? a refusal is an AUTOMATIC suspension of your DL also, no waiting on the court case, no ifs ands or buts such as would be with a DUI. i'm telling you, the advice you are giving is dangerous. if anybody follows it they are crazy. also, an officer is not required to give you a field sobriety test. a PBT will suffice, and a refusal of a PBT will also suffice if the officer feels you are unable to safely drive the vehicle.

RWS, the penalties aren't any more steep for refusal. Again I repeat first refusal penalty is 90 day suspension. A first offense DUI will result in a 90 day suspension so you haven't lost anything by refusing if you're convicted.

Many succesful retained DUI attorneys do and will give the same advice, I know this because I'm friends with a couple of them. No offense meant but I do take and respect their advice over yours.

[runswithscissors 33]

"

i deal with it on a daily basis, i work at a police department. by refusing you are only putting yourself in a bad position with a judge, because you have a way of proving that you are not drunk by taking a PBT or other methods of tests. the reason penalties are harsher for a per se refusal are for that very reason. you may think you are taking the "biggest piece of evidence" from the prosecution, but you are a fool if you rely on that in court. why do you think refusal penalties are so much more steep than a regular DUI? a refusal is an AUTOMATIC suspension of your DL also, no waiting on the court case, no ifs ands or buts such as would be with a DUI. i'm telling you, the advice you are giving is dangerous. if anybody follows it they are crazy. also, an officer is not required to give you a field sobriety test. a PBT will suffice, and a refusal of a PBT will also suffice if the officer feels you are unable to safely drive the vehicle.

RWS, the penalties aren't any more steep for refusal. Again I repeat first refusal penalty is 90 day suspension. A first offense DUI will result in a 90 day suspension so you haven't lost anything by refusing if you're convicted.

Many succesful retained DUI attorneys do and will give the same advice, I know this because I'm friends with a couple of them. No offense meant but I do take and respect their advice over yours.

good luck with that if you ever refuse. even our public defender hates refusals because they are so much more difficult to defend. just telling you how it is from this side of the law.

[sntemp 0]

"

good luck with that if you ever refuse. even our public defender hates refusals because they are so much more difficult to defend. just telling you how it is from this side of the law.

rws, it won't be an issue for me as I don't drink and drive. But what sane person would EVER let a public defender represent them in anything? Best advice I could give is to sell everything you own to get a retained attorney.

Public Defenders hate it because they actually have to work as opposed to just telling their clients to accept what the prosecutor is offering.

[jumbo 0]

"

good luck with that if you ever refuse. even our public defender hates refusals because they are so much more difficult to defend. just telling you how it is from this side of the law.

rws, it won't be an issue for me as I don't drink and drive. But what sane person would EVER let a public defender represent them in anything? Best advice I could give is to sell everything you own to get a retained attorney.

Public Defenders hate it because they actually have to work as opposed to just telling their clients to accept what the prosecutor is offering.

You cant touch Runswithrock he knows Julio Jones.

[runswithscissors 33]

"

good luck with that if you ever refuse. even our public defender hates refusals because they are so much more difficult to defend. just telling you how it is from this side of the law.

rws, it won't be an issue for me as I don't drink and drive. But what sane person would EVER let a public defender represent them in anything? Best advice I could give is to sell everything you own to get a retained attorney.

Public Defenders hate it because they actually have to work as opposed to just telling their clients to accept what the prosecutor is offering.

You cant touch Runswithrock he knows Julio Jones.

shouldn't you be making out and talking about kittens with The Prowler right now?

[AUesquire 1]

"

good luck with that if you ever refuse. even our public defender hates refusals because they are so much more difficult to defend. just telling you how it is from this side of the law.

rws, it won't be an issue for me as I don't drink and drive. But what sane person would EVER let a public defender represent them in anything? Best advice I could give is to sell everything you own to get a retained attorney.

Public Defenders hate it because they actually have to work as opposed to just telling their clients to accept what the prosecutor is offering.

Now THIS is good advice if you believe in your case. I don't do criminal defense anymore but I can tell you, never put your fate in the hands of someone just trying to get through a docket of countless cases.

[quietfan 233]

See, I understand that driving is a privilege, not a right, hense the need to get a government license to do so. And I can understand "implied consent" as a part of the licensing requirements. But I would think in that case the worst that could happen for refusal would be revocation of the license for not following licensing requirements, not criminal charges.

What I don't understand is how being asked to blow without Miranda protection is any different that being asked point blank "Are you guilty?" without Miranda protection. It still seems like testifying against yourself, which constitutionally you don't have to do--in the field or in court.