A friend of mine was charged with a DUI in Florida?

My friend was on the way home and was pulled over for speeding. The cop suspected she was drinking and told her to do a field sobriety test. She did have two beers. Anyways, he had her walk in a straight line (which was not the problem) and stand on one foot and hop around (which was the problem) and I don't even think the hopping around is part of a sobriety test.

She told the officer that she is scheduled for foot surgery on Tuesday and that she could not do this. Her feet are very disformed and she was also in a very severe automobile accident that almost cost her her life and now is medically retired from the Army.

She asked them to do a breathalyzer but they said they couldn't do one until they got back to the station. They arrested her and then when she took her breathalyzer she was only .04 and the legal limit is .08. They had her do it three times because they weren't satistied with a .04. She had to stay in jail for 8 hours and they had her car impounded eventhough her boyfriend was there (they wouldn't let him drive).

So now she is paying for a lawyer, the towing charge, and the impound charge.

Do you have any advice? Is it right to arrest someone based solely on a field sobriety test?

Zach

She should definitely get a lawyer because there is a possibility with her blowing so low to get the charges dropped. But, yes it is right and commonly seen for the police to arrest someone solely based on the field sobriety test. You can see this on cop shows all the time, and I have seen this done in real life. The police do not have to give her boyfriend permission to drive the vehicle and have the right to impound the car. If you commit a felony, which a DUI is while using a vehicle, the police have every right to impound the vehicle.

OH MY GOD! ITS KRISTY

come to Fl on vacation, leave on probation..lol. i have lived in fl all my life and hate it..i think she is just going to have to deal with it and move on. florida is a greedy tourist state. move out as fast as you can!

little78lucky

anything above a .00 can be a DUI, a .08 or above would be a DWI
you even stated that she had 2 beers so she was Driving Under the Influence of 2 beers hence a DUI.

queenie_lori

316.193 Driving under the influence; penalties.--

(1) A person is guilty of the offense of driving under the influence and is subject to punishment as provided in subsection (2) if the person is driving or in actual physical control of a vehicle within this state and:

(a) The person is under the influence of alcoholic beverages, any chemical substance set forth in s. 877.111, or any substance controlled under chapter 893, when affected to the extent that the person's normal faculties are impaired;

(b) The person has a blood-alcohol level of 0.08 or more grams of alcohol per 100 milliliters of blood; or

(c) The person has a breath-alcohol level of 0.08 or more grams of alcohol per 210 liters of breath.

--------------------

In order to convict someone in the state of Florida of a DUI, you have to meet all elements of the offense. My guess is the State is going for 316.193(1). If that is the case, here are the elements of the offense for that, which are found in Jury Instruction 28.1:

28.1 DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE
Â§ 316.193(1), Fla. Stat.

To prove the crime of Driving under the Influence, the State must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

1.(Defendant) drove or was in actual physical control of a vehicle.

2.While driving or in actual physical control of the vehicle, (defendant)

Give 2a or b or both as applicable.
a. was under the influence of [alcoholic beverages] [a chemical substance] [a controlled substance] to the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.

b. had a [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of .08 or more grams
of alcohol per [100 milliliters of blood] [210 liters of breath].

Give if applicable. (Offenses committed prior to October 1, 2008, alcohol level of .20 or higher.)
If you find the defendant guilty of Driving under the Influence, you must also determine whether the State has proven beyond a reasonable doubt whether:

a. the defendant had a [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of .15 or
higher while driving or in actual physical control of the
vehicle.

b. the defendant was accompanied in the vehicle by a person
under the age of 18 years at the time of the driving under
the influence.

Definitions. Give as applicable.
Vehicle is every device, in, upon or by which any person or property is, or may be, transported or drawn upon a highway, except devices used exclusively upon stationary rails or tracks.

Normal faculties include but are not limited to the ability to see, hear, walk, talk, judge distances, drive an automobile, make judgments, act in emergencies and, in general, to normally perform the many mental and physical acts of our daily lives.

Actual physical control of a vehicle means the defendant must be physically in or on the vehicle and have the capability to operate the vehicle, regardless of whether [he] [she] is actually operating the vehicle at the time.

Alcoholic beverages are considered to be substances of any kind and description which contain alcohol.

( ) is a controlled substance under Florida law. Ch. 893, Fla. Stat.

( ) is a chemical substance under Florida law. Â§ 877.111(1), Fla. Stat.

When appropriate, give one or more of the following instructions on the presumptions of impairment established by Â§ 316.1934(2)(a), (2)(b), and (2)(c), Fla. Stat.
1.If you find from the evidence that while driving or in actual physical control of a motor vehicle, the defendant had a blood or breath-alcohol level of .05 or less, you shall presume that the defendant was not under the influence of alcoholic beverages to the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired; but this presumption may be overcome by other evidence demonstrating that the defendant was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.

2.If you find from the evidence that while driving or in actual physical control of a motor vehicle, the defendant had a blood or breath-alcohol level in excess of .05 but less than .08, that fact does not give rise to any presumption that the defendant was or was not under the influence of alcoholic beverages to the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired. In such cases, you may consider that evidence along with other evidence in determining whether the defendant was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.

3.If you find from the evidence that while driving or in actual physical control of a motor vehicle, the defendant had a blood or breath-alcohol level of .08 or more, that evidence would be sufficient by itself to establish that the defendant was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired. But this evidence may be contradicted or rebutted by other evidence demonstrating that the defendant was not under the influence of alcoholic beverages

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: