YaleAnge98
For the duration of a driving while intoxicated investigation, cops will usually administer a series of so-called "field sobriety tests" (FSTs). This might include a battery of 3 to 5 tests, usually selected by the officer; these may include walk-and-turn, one-leg-stand, horizontal gaze nystagmus, fingers-to-thumb, finger-to-nose, Rhomberg (modified position of attention), alphabet recitation, or hand-pat. In an increasing quantity of police agencies in DUI Lawyer Orange County, California and over the nation, a "standardized" battery of three tests will be given - walk-and-turn, one-leg-stand and nystagmus - and they must be scored objectively instead of using an officer's subjective opinion.
How valid are these FSTs? Not very, in accordance with DUI Lawyer Orange County CA Taylor, a former prosecutor and the composer of the key legal textbook "Drunk Driving Defense, 6th edition". The tests are fundamentally "designed for failure". In 1991, Taylor reports, Dr . Spurgeon Cole of Clemson University conducted research on the accuracy of field sobriety tests. His staff videotaped 21 individuals performing 6 common field sobriety tests, then showed the tapes to 14 police and asked them to decide if the suspects had "had a great deal to drink to operate a vehicle. " Unknown to the officers, the blood-alcohol concentration of each and every of the 21 subjects was. 00%. The outcomes: 46% of that time period the officers gave their opinion that the subject was too inebriated to drive. In other words, the FSTs were hardly more accurate at predicting intoxication than flipping a coin. Cole and Nowaczyk, "Field Sobriety Tests: Are They Designed for Failure? ", 79 Perceptual and Motor Skills 99 (1994).
What about the new, improved "standardized" DUI tests? Research funded by the National Highway Traffic Administration determined that the three most reliable field sobriety tests were walk-and-turn, one-leg stand, and horizontal gaze nystagmus. Yet, even using these supposedly more accurate -- and objectively scored -- tests, the researchers found that 47% of the subjects who have already been arrested based on test performance actually had blood-alcohol concentrations of less than the legal limit. Quite simply, nearly half of all persons "failing" the tests were not legally under the influence of alcohol!
Based on the Orange County DUI Attorneylawyers in Mr. Taylor's Southern California law firm, the fact that these tests are largely unfamiliar to most people, and that they get under excessively unfortunate circumstances, make sure they are more difficult for folks to perform. As few as two miscues in performance can result in a person being classified as "impaired" because of alcohol consumption when the problem may actually function as result of unfamiliarity with the test.
