If it's 0.08 or above that's all I need for a case. If it's less, I can still prosecute but I need some moving violations and fail field sobriety

Isn’t it .08 that’s the legal limit?

I think it’s that in NC anyways.

Well I was told in school that it's just driving u der the influence

So while they need you to blow .08 to prove it, they can also get it by having you say you had a couple drinks or something similar

This was from a lawyer telling us to watch the hell out what questions we answer and how

Lots of fun cop stuff just from talking to people

Oh now that’s interesting.

I was under the impression it was legal to drive with up to .08 BAC as long as you aren’t running people over or something wild.

If you admit to a crime you admit to a crime

If you say you had a few drinks and they get you for some infraction they dont really need the BAC

At least in my state

Oh ok. Might be different in Arizona then.

Same for weed

Just dont answer possibly incriminating questions. Dont want to find out the hard way.

Yeah exactly <:TheodoreRooseveltLaugh:585130800870195200>

Legal limit means "presumed impaired". That number itself is evidence of impairment, alone

With a lower number you need some other way to show impairment, unsafe to drive. So some moving violations, or driver's actions during the stop

Oh I see

It may depend a little on how your state law is written

But we have a charge for 0.08 and a charge for "less than safe"

I think many places have a .05

And as always 0 tolerance for under 21

Here they are talking about lowering it

Under 21 is 0.02 because the intoxilyzer can't read below that

If your BAC was 0.01 there's no way to know without blood draw

Problem with that is, you have to get the blood within three hours of the exact time the car stopped. One minute over? Evidence is not admissible.

And to get blood, you need a search warrant. To get a search warrant, you need a judge. And it's probably at night.

So you have to do your roadside investigation, establish PC for arrest, take him to jail, go fill out the warrant affidavit, by now at least one hour has passed

But what if you do blood draw at say 5 hours and they still have above .08 despite not having access to alcohol? Why would it be inadmissible?

I mean obviously they were drunk at stop if theybare drunk 5 hours later.

The blood would be inadmissible I believe

But if for some reason it took that long to get a breath sample, it's still good

And you got all your other evidence...field sobriety and moving violations

Really it's hard to win DUI cases, most get pleaded down to reckless driving or something like that

You make the best case you can and if they don't wanna plead, then you offer a deal

A shitty case, they'll fight

If you ever want off on a DUI you just stall. In Canada you used to be allowed to have a lawyer present before you blow. They’ll get stuck in traffic and take their time to get you.
Now Canada law is fucked. You can be forced to blow without reason and you can be questioned and tested after arriving at your destination within the first hour or so. So if you cracked a few beers after a cop followed you home from the liqohr store you could be nailed. Unlikely they would do that, but it's disturbing that they could.

Australia is the same, no PC required for a stop

I'm strict on DUI but if you don't require PC then 99% of the stops will be innocent people

China's BAC limit is 0. Any blood alcohol content is DUI. There's no such thing as traffic court there either so if a traffic officer says you're guilty, then you're guilty.