17XXXXXXXXT

The client was arrested on suspicion of DUI after the officer observed him pulling out of a Circle K into the outermost lane at 12:30 am and then “continously swerving” over a period of 3/4 mile. Another officer arrived to perform Field Sobriety Exercises to which the officer made two separate reports. The law enforcement officers indicated they smelled marijuana in Mcbride’s vehicle but did not find any upon a search. Upon completion of the exercises, the client was arrested and taken to the jail where he provided two breath samples of .057 and .059. The breath test operator made observations of Mcbride and included those observations in her report, along with statements that the client allegedly made about consuming alcohol. The client was then asked to provide a urine sample, which he refused. At trial, we impeached each officer on inconsistencies among their courtroom testimony and their police report. Each officer included different descriptions of the clients eyes, speech pattern and balance. Then we emphasized that the client provided a breath test below the legal limit and that he performed the FSE’s very well. We were also able to exclude any testimony of a refusal to take the urine test based on a lack of testimony to informed consent being provided. The jury deliberated for 15 minutes and provided a not guilty verdict.