unfortunately, even the "dismissals" NEVER [completely] vanish, as they'll still see the arrest on the FBI criminal history report as well as (in most states) the MVR note that accompanied the license suspension. It's always "still out there," especially since it was so recent in your case and even more so since it finally ended up in a conviction.

On another note, it's really bullheaded and ignorant to tell someone that their DUI wasn't possible after two beers. Yea, the authorities hear that all the time. But the BAC reading they take measures alcohol content in the bloodstream by volume. A two-beer DUI IS most definitely possible. You've GOT to consider alcohol content by volume of those two beers, the time lapse between consumption and the breathalizer test, the "offender's" body weight including BMI, metabolic rate, and stomach contents. There are other factors that play a role in the final BAC measurement. So, 320, if you want to use your IPOD BAC application in determining your fitness to drive as you obviously have in denouncing this guy's request for information, by all means... but be sure to have a bail bondsman on hand.

AV8R, i've been there, and I'm sorry for the huge pain in your ass. The regs state that you were to notify the securities division within 60 days after the initial action (arrest) itself, regardless of the conviction. If you don't let them know before they find out, there will be many more problems than finding the kosher way to let them know about it (which is apparently what you're doing). I hear they're really getting to be hardasses about this. I know (from experience) that that lawyer is expensive as hell, but compared to what you spent on all your tickets, maybe he/she's a little more worth the expense? I'd be curious as to what those aviation attorneys will tell you, as well as what effectiveness a NASA form might have with respect to the 60-day reg (hey, it was unintentional!).

best of luck, man. i didn't have any certificate at all when mine went down, AND i was a "minor." but if you need to know anything medical related as well as how the dui will play in, drop me a line.

 

Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! Where do you get that crap???

What is admissible varies by state, but generally in the US field sobriety tests are admissible. States may have specific requirements as to what tests are used and how they are conducted. Some states may even not admit these tests, but most do. Note that admission of evidence does not equal guilt, that's up to the jury.

You can get arrested for DUI based on any of a number of probable causes...whether you get charged/indicted and convicted is another issue.

The portable breathalyzers were NOT designed to produce a legal BAC results...but these days they are often being admitted as evidence anyway to show probable cause for the arrest and to strengthen the case. Again, it varies by state.

Bottom line, thanks to MADD, this game is heavily weighted towards the interests of the state. You are pretty much presumed guilty and have to prove otherwise (driving is a privilege, not a right). Society's natural and justifiable anger towards a few reckless and irresponsible repeat offenders has unfortunately been redirected towards responsible citizens who have a glass of wine with dinner. The reprobates can't be stopped...lack of license or insurance does not dissuade them. We need to take them out back and shoot them, but since society won't do that it takes out it's anger on anyone who drinks.

Safest thing to do is not drink and drive at all. f you must make sure you stay well below the levels which SHOULD impair you taking into account all the physiological issues (body mass, alcohol content, rest, food, passage of time). Also know the rules in YOUR state...the smell of beer on your breath could create a lot of hassles even if you are unimpaired.

 

Hate to tell you, but you are the one who is "wrong Wrong Wrong"

 

Safest thing to do is not drink at all.
Have some coke instead. (make of this what you want. :>)

 

Sigh......Let me walk you through a DUI arrest.

Stop vehicle for infraction, one that is usually a sign of impairment. Not maintaining it's lane, wide turn, etc. Reason for stop is justified. Make contact with driver, driver appears to be impaired, Note that manual dexterity is poor, speech is slurred, I now have reason to believe that this person is impaired. Person is removed from the car, given Standard Field Sobriety Tests or SFSTs for short. (horizontal gaze nystagmus, walk and turn). Subject fails SFSTs. You then read Implied consent to the subject. (You have operated a vehicle in X state, and in X state when operating a vehicle you must consent to a chemical test because you have exercised the privilege of operating a vehicle on x state's roadways. If you do not consent to a chemical test, a warrant for your blood will be issued within x hours (usually only 1 or 2) and your license will be automatically suspended for X amount of days) If the subject refuses to blow on the actual breathalizer at the station or jail or whereever, you advise subject they are now under arrest, you then get the warrant signed by the judge, transport the prisoner to the local hospital have a nurse draw blood for testing, then transport the prisoner back to the Jail, this person is arrested for "Refusal". More charges will come later as the BAC results return.
If the subject consents to a breathalizer (a legal large machine at the station/jail/whereever) once they blow, and it is above .08 then the subject is placed under arrest at this time. They are charged with actual DUI.
Everything that occurried during the traffic stop was nothing more than steps leading up to the actual arrest. Admitting to drinking even 100 beers or failing a portable breath test during the traffic stop itself is not legal grounds for an arrest.

 

????

Sure it is...try it sometime and see what happens. Probably cause is legal grounds for arrest. They might decide not to book you if you get to the station and then blow 0.03.

But cops don't just give drunk drivers a ride to the station without arresting them...involuntarily and wearing handcuffs. If they did that to me, I would simply confess everything on the ride over...OOOPS! They didn't read me my rights! I'd be off the hook on that one...


BTW different states have slightly different rules...what applies in your state may not apply anywhere else.

 

Failing only one clue (i.e. just the walk and turn and/or horizontal gaze nystagmus) is not enough probable cause for an arrest for DUI. Yes, you are not under arrest until after you fail the BAC datamaster or refuse to blow. And yes, you can get a ride to the jail, test under and be taken home, although that usually never happens because if you are over .05, you can still be arrested for impairment. Thats the kicker, .08 is not the magic number.
You are simply being detained for a criminal investigation and not free to leave so everything you say on the ride over can be putt into the report, you don't need to be read miranda because you are not under arrest yet.

I am not going to sit here and lecture you on flying the CRJ, don't explain to me how to do my job.

 

I'm in california. I did a lot of JAG investigations in parallel with civilian prosecutions. The police can stop you and ask you some questions without reading your rights, and can ask you to do a FST. But if they place you under duress (a situation where you are significantly intimidated) they had better mirandize you. "Arrest" is in the eye of the beholder...a ride to the station in handcuffs puts most folks under duress.

They can detain witnesses for investigation, but if you are obviously a suspect and they don't read your rights, no bueno.

I'm not up-to-date on the process, but it can't have changed THAT much.

What state are you in?

 

This is true for any other contacts or arrest, actually it's called the 10 minute rule. (The courts have ruled a reasonable person after 10 minutes feels they are being detained and are not free to leave, and a normal traffic stop, should take no longer than 10 minutes) however, DUI is a different animal, as soon as you read implied consent, that 10 minute rules disappears, the courts have ruled, that since you are operating a vehicle which has been ruled as a privilege not right, and a police officer believes that you are impaired, he can do what he needs to in a reasonable amount of time to determine this.

 

First off, everything written above is completely wrong. Law and admissibility rules vary by jurisdiction.

Second, I had a co-worker get pinched by the FAA for failing to report a DUI arrest. 3 YEARS after the fact they found out.

....they did an emergency revocation of all of his certificates.

Good luck with this one, I'm afraid you're really going to need it.