Not having a bad video helps your case. Not having a good video hurts your case. The jury values scientific evidence the most, like blood or breath tests. Every case is different so what works on one case may not work on another. There are psychological factors that come into play also. You really should hire a lawyer to help you with this. There are excellent lawyers in Houston.
If this answer was helpful to you or if it was the best answer, please click the buttons that state helpful and best answer. Please understand that all of my answers are for informational purposes only, are not legal advise, and do not create an attorney-client relationship between you and me. I am not your attorney and you are not my client unless we enter into a signed contract. My only legal advise to you is that you should immediately consult with and hire a lawyer and that you should not represent yourself. If you want to more information about personal injury, visit http://www.sainjurylawyer.com or if you want more information about criminal defense, visit http://www.giardinolawfirm.com. Good luck!
Juries tend to rely heavily on officer testimony. More often than not, the officer's testimony makes the tests sound much worse than they look. I'm almost always better off with video of the SFSTs.
Macy Jaggers's answer to a legal question on Avvo does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Ms. Jaggers offers everyone a free consultation to discuss their case. Feel free to call her office at 214-365-9800 to make an appointment (phones are answered 24 hours) or visit her website at www.macyjaggers.com for more information about her services and recent victories.
A video is usually more help than harm because it allows an expert to disagree with officer when appropriate and shows everyone what actually happened. The cops are trained to testify effectively and they are hard to beat, even with a good video. Its fair to challenge cops on not having video taped the scene, because video is so common now. Jury might wonder if cop is trying to hide something.
A lot will depend on why the video is not available. If the officer had anything to do with the failure to record the stop - in my experience - that has helped the defense.
My comments are not intended to establish an attorney-client relationship, are not confidential, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Proper legal advice can only be given by an attorney who agrees to represent you, who reviews the facts of your specific case, who does not have a conflict of interest preventing the representation, and who is licensed to practice in the appropriate jurisdiction where the legal issue may be filed or in the state where the law applies
Generally video is helpful to the defense. When it is one person's word against another, the cop is believed and you are not. The exception is if the video shows you falling all over yourself.
Often people think that because it isn’t a murder case, a drunk driving case is simple. Nothing could be further from the truth. These cases can be among the most complex a criminal defense lawyer handles. The government is willing to spend an incredible amount of money to convict you though. They will have expert witnesses available for consultation and trial. This is not a do-it-yourself situation.
That you have been charged or that some contraption says your alcohol level was at a certain level does not mean that you are guilty. It certainly does not mean that you can be proven guilty using competent, valid evidence.
Field sobriety “tests” are designed to give police a reason to arrest. You cannot “pass” them. The police will admit that almost a third of healthy young adults who take these tests without any alcohol will be judged to be “under the influence” – and that assumes they are properly administered!
After even a first drunk driving conviction, you may face employment discrimination. You will certainly be charged higher for insurance. Having such a conviction will also make you a target for drunk driving arrest in future interactions with police. You will automatically become a suspect.
You will want a lawyer who is familiar with field sobriety “tests,” perhaps one who is certified to administer these tests. You will want a lawyer familiar with the weaknesses of the contraptions that are used to report alcohol or drug levels. You want an experienced trial lawyer, used to cross-examining police officers. Police officers are practiced, experienced witnesses.
That is, you want an experienced drunk driving defense lawyer, whether you call the offense DUI, OWI, DWI, OUI, or drugged driving.
If any answer on AVVO helps you, mine or someone else’s, please mark it as "helpful" or "best answer" to help AVVO know which answers to show others.
--- Experienced DUI/DWI/OWI/Drunk Driving Lawyer in Madison, Wisconsin
--- Facebook Page Madison (Dane County) Wisconsin Drunk Driving / OWI / DWI / DUI Lawyer
--- Field sobriety "tests" – Madison (Dane County) Wisconsin DUI / DWI / OWI / Drunk Driving lawyer
--- Drugged Driving/DUI/DWI/Drunk Driving with Prescription Drugs – Madison (Dane County) Wisconsin
--- Which Offenses Count as Priors in Wisconsin? - Madison Dane County Wisconsin DUI OWI Drunk Driving Lawyer answers
--- Ten Days to Save Your License - Administrative Suspension and Refusals in Madison (Dane County) Wisconsin
Confidential information should not be disclosed in this Internet forum.
I am an experienced Wisconsin drunk driving (DUI/OWI/DWI) defense lawyer practicing in Madison (Dane County) Wisconsin. The laws in each jurisdiction can be very different. I cannot give legal advice over the Internet nor can I establish an attorney client relationship with you.
If something I say disagrees with what your own lawyer is telling you, you should rely on your lawyer who is familiar with you, your entire case, the local courts and practices.
To deal with a legal problem, nothing is better than to consult with a lawyer who will give you some time and advice. If you cannot afford an attorney, there should be agencies in your area that can provide discounted, or even free, legal services.
This AVVO Answer is provided for general educational purposes only.
See “more” link below for more important information about this answer and AVVO.
Confidential information should not be disclosed in this Internet forum. Click on the "More..." link for IMPORTANT INFORMATION about this AVVO Answer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I am an experienced Wisconsin lawyer. The laws in each jurisdiction can be very different. I cannot give legal advice over the internet nor can I establish an attorney client relationship with you. You should NOT assume or otherwise conclude that there is an attorney -client relationship between any reader and this writer or his firm. These comments are only guideposts. They are not subject to any privilege protections. Indeed, these internet communications are neither privileged nor confidential. Accordingly, those using this form of communication need to be guarded in what they write. Because of the nature of these communications the information is general only and should not be relied upon in any specific case. This internet site is public forum, where the communications are not confidential or privileged. There may very well be merit to your defense or position in this type of situation. However, there are hardly sufficient details for an attorney to provide you with some path to follow. It is imperative that ALL of the facts in a particular situation be examined. No conclusion can be drawn from the communication that you have provided. There are some matters that are just better handled by an attorney familiar with the procedures of the courts in your area. Most, if not all, legal matters should not be handled via internet communication. At best, the responders on this site can give you a few hints and guidance. To deal with a legal problem, nothing is better than to consult with a lawyer who will give you some time and advice. If you cannot afford an attorney, there should be agencies in your area that can provide discounted, or even free, legal services. For a definitive answer you should seek legal advice from an attorney who (1) is licensed to practice in the state which has jurisdiction; (2) has experience in the area of law you are asking about, and (3) has been retained as your attorney for representation or consultation. Your question and the attorney’s answer may be used for promotional or educational purposes.
The video shows the absurdity of the Standardized Field Sobriety Test "clues". For example, the Walk and Turn clue of "couldn't balance during the instruction phase" sounds pretty bad. Yet when you watch the video, you see that the client who otherwise had perfect balance, inadvertently stepped out of the starting position while watching the officer demonstrate the test. Of course, this doesn't apply if you looked and sounded intoxicated on the video. I agree that juries tend to believe the Officer, unless he's a really bad officer. Remember, the trial is a story, and in that story the officer is usually seen as the hero.. That I learned from Lawrence Taylor, a member of the National College of DUI defense, and an excellent DUI Lawyer out of California. Hope this helps.
James R. "Jim" Butler,Houston,Texas,DWI Lawyer. Free Consultation .Call (713)236-8744. I only represent people accused of DWI in Texas.