Commonwealth v Client JM 12-CR2012
Mar 13, 2013OUTCOME: NOT GUILTY
East Brookfield A Hopkinton man was arrested by State Police and charged with OUI, Marked Lanes Violations, No License in Possession and Defective Equipment, Headlight. Troopers allege that on a ... early Saturday last November at 1:20 AM, they observed the client weaving in a "zig-zag" manner crossing the center line on a number of occasions. Additionally, the vehicle the client was operating had a headlight out. After the stop of the car, the client could not locate their drivers license. Troopers testified that the client had slurred speech and a strong odor of alcohol on his breath. When questioned by the police has to where the client was coming from, they responded a "gentleman's club" in the area where he had consumed some drinks. Field Sobriety Tests were administered to the client. He performed the alphabet test which the trooper said was slurred and mumbled. The 9 step walk and turn test was performed on the side of the road along with the one legged stand. The trooper testified that the client did not walk in a straight line and did not make heel to toe contact on the steps along with stepping off the line. On the one legged stand test, testimony was that the client kept his foot in the air for only 11 seconds. Through cross examination of the police witnesses, it was established that there were a number of mitigating factors. We established that the client recited all 26 letters of the alphabet in the correct order and that which the trooper could not understand may have been caused by his radio or passing traffic noise. Cross examination revealed that although there was the breakdown lane line on the road, the trooper had the client walk on an imaginary line. We argued that the imaginary line used, was in fact, the client's imaginary line and he stayed on "his" line. Further cross examination demonstrated the 11 seconds he had his foot in the air, was actually closer to 22 seconds. We were able to establish that he trooper had the client count by 1000's such as "1001 and 1002" and the pace actually timed out to at least twice the time. This case is a good example of why one should never agree to take the field sobriety tests or respond to inquires has consumption of alcohol. Fortunately for our client they were found NOT GUILTY of OUI. Real Cases, Real People, Real Results. Commonwealth v. JM 12-CR2027
