Follow by Email

Wednesday, July 23, 2014

0.30 BAC - Really drunk... but "Driving"?

0.30 BAC - Really drunk... but "Driving"?

David Glenn Ridings

Practice Area:  DUI/DWI



Facts based upon actual case.  The events described herein, actually occurred.

Defendant (an admitted relapsed alcoholic) drinks heavily, enters a local restaurant, eats, and calls his AA sponsor to come get him. As he leaves the establishment, the employees notice how intoxicated he is.  The defendant, having called his AA sponsor, decides to wait in his car, and talks on the phone.  He turns the car on to plug in the phone and use the charger.  And... he waits for his "ride".   Charging the phone required the keys to be in the ignition. (for future reference... always a BAD idea to wait in your car if you are intoxicated. Especially in the drivers seat).

Police are called by the concerned employees in the restaurant, and police respond. Defendant's sponsor who was 40 minutes away... arrives, literally, 21 seconds after police arrive. The officer wasn't even out of the car yet. And, in spite of the explanation of the defendant and the sponsor, the man is arrested and blows a .30% BAC.

Now... I know... that is REALLY intoxicated. But at the same time, he had NO intention of driving. The evidence showed he waited for nearly 40 minutes for the ride to arrive... which was a crucial fact for the district attorney.  In the end, that fact saved the day for this client.

His case had been set for trial, but was dismissed on trial date prior to the trial commencing.

Case dismissed.

Note: While not adviseable every time... this client cooperated with every test. He took all standardized field sobriety tasks (SFT's) and agreed to a breath test.  He did that because he felt like he would be exonerated later due to the fact that he was not driving, nor did he intend to drive.  People ask me all the time if they should have submitted to the SFT's and/or the Breath or blood tests.  And, while there is not a "standard" answer as to whether or not to take the SFT's or Breath/Blood tests... the submission to the tests in this case worked well for the defendant.  My usual response to taking very subjective tests is "no".  But that is not true in every case.  The reason for that, however, is because the tests are so "subjective"... meaning, different officers or people could interpret the same test results differently.

In the end, it is always best to consult an experienced Nashville DUI Lawyer if charged with a DUI.  You should interview and select the best Nashville DUI Attorney that you can find in order to help you with your case.  Had this defendant not done that, the outcome would have certainly been different.

Call Nashville DUI Attorney David Ridings anytime for a free consultation. 615-851-1888

Click here for client reviews of Nashville Criminal Attorney David Ridings

1 comment:

  1. This type of message always inspiring and I prefer to read quality content, so happy to find good place to many here in the post, the writing is just great, thanks for the post. criminal defense attorney in atlanta ga