Before I commence my portrayal of probable cause, in particular as it relates to Seattle DUI accusations, I want to point out that this editorial is for educational purposes. If you are charged with a Seattle DUI or facing a Seattle criminal, please call a Seattle DUI attorney for consultation on your particular case. Do not rely on this as legal counsel, as each case is so factually special specific advice is mandatory.
Probable cause is by and large viewed as a mixed problem of law and fact. It requires extensive evidence and a legal determination of probable cause. Considerable proof requires "a satisfactory amount of substantiation in the record to influence a fair-minded, normal individual of the accuracy of the determination." It is the who, what, when, and where of the study.
For instance, let's suppose we have a man driving around in Seattle subsequent to having consumed several beers. He is stopped by a police officer for speeding - 37 in a 25. He is otherwise driving ordinarily, including pulling off to the side of the street in a responsible way. At this instant there likely is no probable cause for criminal, though there is probable cause for speeding. But what if when the officer approaches the driver he notices a robust odor of alcohol and his eyes were watery and bloodshot. This might climb to the quantity of considerable support of DUI.
The subsequent element of probable cause is whether the evidence substantiate a legal determination of probable cause. Essentially, do the details as acknowledged confirm a reasonable belief that a crime has been committed. In this set of circumstances, maybe so, perhaps not. Individuals are permitted to drink and then drive (just not when impaired by booze), and the watery eyes may be described away by something else.
So, what if the police officer then asks the driver to complete field sobriety tests (which you are able to and must always decline to do in the State of Washington) and he does, failing to tap his finger to his nose, failing to balance on one leg, and failing to touch heel to toe in a walk and turn check? Is that an adequate amount of for an police officer to obtain a logical conclusion that the driver was driving under the influence of liquor? Likely. It is positively a stronger situation for the officer (although not definitive - injuries and weather conditions may have been a factor, for example).
Now, why is this critical for you, the typical Seattle voter? Because it is vital to realize that whenever a officer stops you and begins to question you he is not fretful with your wellbeing (except in those clear conditions) and is frequently trying to collect sufficient data from you to confirm probable cause. And it is even more critical to appreciate it is within your Constitutional rights to refuse to give him data he will in the end exploit against you (despite the fact that you must present your license, registration, and act courteously to the police officer).
If you do find yourself probably to be captured for DUI, talk to the cops as little as possible by declining respectfully ("I'd respectfully decline to answer that problem") and if things continue to heat up request to have a minute to speak to your Seattle criminal attorney. Even if they get you to say things your Seattle criminal lawyer will have a good chance of getting it thrown out (you ought to never waive our rights, for your information).
Related Posts:
Seattle DUI Attorney and Search Incident to Arrest
Seattle DUI and Field Sobriety Tests
