Before I embark on my explanation of probable cause, in particular as it relates to Seattle criminal charges, I want to point out that this article is for educational purposes. If you are charged with a DUI, please get in touch with a Seattle criminal attorney for consultation on your precise case. Do not rely on this as legal counsel, as each set of circumstances is so factually special particular counsel is mandatory.
Probable cause is in general viewed as a mixed problem of law and fact. It requires extensive facts and a legal conclusion of probable cause. Sizeable proof requires "a adequate amount of evidence in the record to persuade a fair-minded, normal individual of the truth of the determination." It is the who, what, when, and where of the analysis.
For instance, let's say we have a man driving around in Seattle after having consumed more than a few cocktails. He is pulled over by a police officer for speeding - 37 in a 25. He is otherwise driving normally, including pulling off to the side of the road in a responsible manner. At this moment there in all probability is no probable cause for criminal, despite the fact that there is probable cause for speeding. But what if when the police officer approaches the driver he smells a robust odor of alcohol and his eyes were watery and bloodshot. This might rise to the level of sizeable evidence of DUI.
The subsequent prong of probable cause is whether the facts substantiate a legal determination of probable cause. Essentially, do the facts as recognized support a rational belief that a crime has been committed. In this set of circumstances, maybe so, perhaps not. People are allowed to drink and then drive (just not when impaired by alcohol), and the watery eyes may be explained away by something else.
So, what if the police officer then asks the driver to carry out field sobriety tests (which you can and must always decline to do in the State of Washington) and he does, failing to touch his finger to his nose, failing to balance on one leg, and failing to touch heel to toe in a walk and turn analysis? Is that an adequate amount of for an officer to derive a rational conclusion that the driver was driving under the influence of booze? In all probability. It is unquestionably a stronger set of circumstances for the officer (although not definitive - injuries and weather circumstances may have been a factor, for instance).
Now, why is this important for you, the usual Seattle resident? Because it is significant to comprehend that each time a cop stops you and begins to question you he is not concerned with your wellbeing (excluding in those obvious situations) and is generally attempting to collect adequate data from you to verify probable cause. And it is even more central to recognize it is within your Constitutional rights to refuse to give him information he will in the end utilize against you (although you should make available your license, registration, and act politely to the officer).
If you do find yourself likely to be apprehended for criminal, talk to the cops as little as possible by saying no politely ("I'd respectfully refuse to answer that problem") and if things continue to heat up request to have a minute to contact your Seattle DUI attorney. Even if they get you to say things your Seattle criminal attorney will have a good chance of getting it thrown out (you should never waive our rights, for your information).
Related Posts:
If You are Running From the Cops, Don't Stop for Tea
Talk to a Seattle DUI Attorney Before You Take a Breathalyzer
