When a New England state congressman was arrested in Connecticut for DUI and possession of marijuana, it effectively ended his political career. ![coldbeerglass.jpg]()
However, our Fort Lauderdale DUI lawyers understand that errors by the arresting officer have resulted in the defendant no longer facing criminal charges.
According to news reports, the officer failed to conduct the urine test in a timely manner and admitted to "possibly embellishing" the result of the field sobriety tests - further proof that such tests are not a solid measurement of a person's intoxication level. As such, they are subject to intense scrutiny by defense lawyers with relative success.
This case was set for trial, when a judge ruled a urine test administered more than two hours after the arrest would not be admissible in court - all but decimating the state's case. Prosecutors decided to drop the DUI charge. The marijuana charge had already been dropped when the former representative agreed to undergo a drug counseling and treatment program.
Although this case involves a Rhode Island congressman in a Connecticut town, the basic principals are entirely relevant here in South Florida.
The case started back in the spring of 2011. The representative was stopped at a DUI checkpoint. The officer who stopped him indicated that the driver smelled of alcohol - and later marijuana - and that his speech was slurred and his eyes were glassed over.
The representative underwent three field sobriety tests - and reportedly failed each of them. The officer also found a small marijuana pipe in the congressman's pocket.
But despite the officer's description of the defendant, he passed a breathalyzer test, registering a 0.05 percent blood alcohol content - well below the 0.08 percent legal limit. The urine test, as well, revealed a blood alcohol concentration of under 0.08 percent (at 0.07 percent). However, that test also showed he had THC in his system - the active ingredient in marijuana. The officer concluded that the combination of the two meant that the lawmaker was intoxicated.
The congressman would later say he did not smoke any marijuana that day, though he had previously admitted to using marijuana to treat pain stemming from his pancreatitis. Medical marijuana is legal in his home state of Rhode Island.
And regardless, presence of marijuana in the system at the time of testing does not equal intoxication because unlike alcohol, the drug stays in your system long after the intoxicating effects have diminished.
While one might think that a delayed urine test might actually serve to help most DUI defendants, as alcohol is known to quickly dissipate from the system, this is actually not the case. Evidence has shown that intoxication levels may actually spike for a time after you stop drinking. So you may get in the car being legally sober, but when an officer takes a urine sample three hours later, your intoxication level may be higher than when you got behind the wheel. That's why that time limit is critical.
Any of these points could have been effectively wielded by the defense. But in the end, it was the officer's own error in not administering the urine test within the required two-hour window (as well as his diminishing value as a witness for having "embellished" official reports) that turned out to be the undoing of this case.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
However, our Fort Lauderdale DUI lawyers understand that errors by the arresting officer have resulted in the defendant no longer facing criminal charges.
According to news reports, the officer failed to conduct the urine test in a timely manner and admitted to "possibly embellishing" the result of the field sobriety tests - further proof that such tests are not a solid measurement of a person's intoxication level. As such, they are subject to intense scrutiny by defense lawyers with relative success.
This case was set for trial, when a judge ruled a urine test administered more than two hours after the arrest would not be admissible in court - all but decimating the state's case. Prosecutors decided to drop the DUI charge. The marijuana charge had already been dropped when the former representative agreed to undergo a drug counseling and treatment program.
Although this case involves a Rhode Island congressman in a Connecticut town, the basic principals are entirely relevant here in South Florida.
The case started back in the spring of 2011. The representative was stopped at a DUI checkpoint. The officer who stopped him indicated that the driver smelled of alcohol - and later marijuana - and that his speech was slurred and his eyes were glassed over.
The representative underwent three field sobriety tests - and reportedly failed each of them. The officer also found a small marijuana pipe in the congressman's pocket.
But despite the officer's description of the defendant, he passed a breathalyzer test, registering a 0.05 percent blood alcohol content - well below the 0.08 percent legal limit. The urine test, as well, revealed a blood alcohol concentration of under 0.08 percent (at 0.07 percent). However, that test also showed he had THC in his system - the active ingredient in marijuana. The officer concluded that the combination of the two meant that the lawmaker was intoxicated.
The congressman would later say he did not smoke any marijuana that day, though he had previously admitted to using marijuana to treat pain stemming from his pancreatitis. Medical marijuana is legal in his home state of Rhode Island.
And regardless, presence of marijuana in the system at the time of testing does not equal intoxication because unlike alcohol, the drug stays in your system long after the intoxicating effects have diminished.
While one might think that a delayed urine test might actually serve to help most DUI defendants, as alcohol is known to quickly dissipate from the system, this is actually not the case. Evidence has shown that intoxication levels may actually spike for a time after you stop drinking. So you may get in the car being legally sober, but when an officer takes a urine sample three hours later, your intoxication level may be higher than when you got behind the wheel. That's why that time limit is critical.
Any of these points could have been effectively wielded by the defense. But in the end, it was the officer's own error in not administering the urine test within the required two-hour window (as well as his diminishing value as a witness for having "embellished" official reports) that turned out to be the undoing of this case.