Criminal Law Blog
March 01, 2007
The police fooled another driver suspected of DWI. Do they say “Ha!” to themselves?
On August 2, 2002, a woman was allegedly driving while intoxicated in Arlington, Texas. Another driver called 911 and the police pulled her over. They asked her for breath and blood specimens. Very cooperative, the driver gave a breath sample, which was negative for alcohol. Even more cooperative, she agreed to give a blood sample.
The trouble was that the nurse couldn’t get a blood sample out of her, even after 5 or 6 tries.
So the “intrepid” officers asked the poor woman for a urine sample. They didn’t tell her that she didn’t have to give a sample. They didn’t tell her that her license would not be suspended if she chose not to give a sample.
The Second Court of Appeals held that the woman’s consent was not voluntary. The Court of Criminal Appeals disagreed and upheld her conviction. Harrison v. State.
Sadly, many people think that police officers will be forthright and honest with them, when the truth is the police can take advantage of a person’s ignorance in all manner of things.
From their point of view, the police may well think this gains them something in the short run. From my point of view, I think this increases distrust of law enforcement in the long run.
This is why I tell my clients not to do any roadside tests and not to blow.