MattaAlmanza301
Aus Salespoint
In the course of a dui investigation, police officers will often administer a number of so-called "field sobriety tests" (FSTs). This may include a battery of three to five tests, usually selected by the officer; these can sometimes 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 amount of police agencies in DUI Lawyer Orange County, California and across the nation, a "standardized" battery of three tests is going to be given - walk-and-turn, one-leg-stand and nystagmus - and they must be scored objectively in place of using an officer's subjective opinion.
How valid are these FSTs? Not very, according to DUI Lawyer Orange County CA Taylor, a former prosecutor and the author of the leading legal textbook "Drunk Driving Defense, 6th edition". The tests are basically "designed for failure". In 1991, Taylor reports, Doctor Spurgeon Cole of Clemson University conducted a study 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 officers and asked them to decide perhaps the suspects had "had a great deal to drink to drive. " As yet not known to the officers, the blood-alcohol concentration of each of the 21 subjects was. 00%. The results: 46% of that time period the officers gave their opinion that the subject was too inebriated to operate a vehicle. 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 newest, improved "standardized" DUI tests? Research funded by the National Highway Traffic Administration determined that the three most effective 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 discovered that 47% of the subjects who would have now been arrested based upon test performance actually had blood-alcohol concentrations of significantly less than the legal limit. In other words, almost half all persons "failing" the tests are not legally consuming alcohol!
In line with the Orange County DUI Attorneylawyers in Mr. Taylor's Southern California attorney, the fact these tests are largely unfamiliar to many people, and they are given under extremely unfortunate circumstances, cause them to become more difficult for folks to do. As few as two miscues in performance can result in an individual being classified as "impaired" because of alcohol consumption when the problem could possibly function as result of unfamiliarity with the test.
