Apparently, this is State specific. Authorities in Ohio now can force drivers who have two or more drunk driving convictions to submit to a blood or urine test without their consent. A new law that took effect on September 30, 2008 allows police offers to demand that a driver take a blood or urine test if they've been convicted two or more times. The law applies to people convicted of driving under the influence twice in six years or five times in the last twenty years. The law also requires an online database to track offenders with drunk-driving or related offenses.

In the unlikely event I were stopped for DUI, I still wouldn't say or do anything without consulting an attorney.

 

Circuit and appellate Courts cannot overrule supreme court rulings. Portable PBT's BAC readings are not admissible in court ANYWHERE.

 

Like I said, you're incorrect. The Minnesota State Patrol carries PBTs that provide admissible results.

I find it hard to believe that SCOTUS has ruled every make and model of PBT as inadmissible, nor would they make a blanket rule precluding future technology from being used in enforcement of DUI laws.

Now, I've been wrong before, if you can cite the case, I'll admit being wrong.

 

If you said or did nothing, In Indiana, that would be refusal and you would be arrested for refusal. And I am not debating whether or not drivers with convictions must submit to chemical tests, that's another topic in itself and irrelevant.

 

Portable "hand held" breathalyzer's, BAC readings do not hold up in court. Yes, you can putt the reading in your Probable Cause narrative, however if you tried to charge someone with DUI/OWI solely on that BAC reading, good luck getting a guilty charge, the prosecutor would probably not even file. The magic number when you see "so and so was arrested for .15" or whatever comes from a large computer like machine that the subject blows into at a PD/Hospital/Jail whereever. That number my friend is the one admissible in court.

 

I agree with this. The portable readings have been admitted as evidence to bolster the case, but not in the absence of a reading from a larger "certified" machine or blood test.

 

I'm sure you have a profession, whether it is flying, I don't know. I would not get on a forum and lecture you on how to do something you do for a living.
This specific topic is my profession, I have hundreds of hours of learning in it and performing it.

You obviously don't understand how a DUI arrest happens. But, instead of listening to my advice and explanation you simply have watched "Cops" too many times and think you know everything. It's OK, that is 70% of this country, caused by things like CSI and what not; I don't know how many simple theft runs I have been on for a simple report, and the complaint ant has demanded that I "dust for prints" or "check for DNA". Unfortunately TV and movies have convinced everyone that today's law enforcement has that capabilities, unfortunately its not like that.

I encourage you to go do a ride along with your local police department, learn about what you are so quick to give incorrect information on, and come back and report.

 

Your previous post when you walked us through a dui arrest, mentioned having a warrant issued for blood sample. In OH, unless you've been convicted twice of dui, you don't have to submit to the test. In fact, you don't have to submit to any test (roadside, portable, etc.) The deck is stacked against you from the start. I'll invoke my right to an attorney before I say or do anything the moment the officer asks whether I've had anything to drink. Fine, I'm arrested for refusal. I'd rather have the attorney before the process begins rather than after the evidence has been collected. You're gonna be arrested regardless.

Maybe during this event, procedure has been compromised. They are in many cases. I would try to contain the damage by limiting the evidence. According to one expert in OH dui law, OH only requires calibration of breathylizers once per week. I'd rather face a judge with the cop's subjective opinion and my subjective opinion. I think the odds are better that way. If you have to plea, then so be it.