State of Maine v. T.F. Offense: Operating Under the Influence

by John on September 19, 2011

Defense Attorney: John Scott Webb, Esq.

Offense: Operating Under the Influence (OUI, DUI, DWI)

Maximum Sentence: 364 days in jail

Synopsis: Client was traveling home from a work function when a police officer passed him on the road. The police officer testified that the plate light on client’s vehicle was out. Police officer followed client for a short distance prior to turning on blue lights, and observed him maintaining a constant speed, but touching and crowding the fog line on the road while he drove. After the stop, the officer noted the smell of intoxicants, client admitted to having “a few beers” and was given field sobriety tests. The officer asked client to rate his sobriety on a scale of 1 to 10, 1 being stone cold sober and 10 being the drunkest he had ever been. Client reported that he was very scared and about a 3. The officer found 4 clues on the horizontal gaze nystagmus test, and client passed the walk and turn, one leg stand, alphabet, and counting backwards. Client was subsequently arrested and taken down to the station for a breath test. Client removed his dentures and became concerned that his dental work may have an adverse affect on the breath test result, so he subsequently refused to take a breath test. At the administrative suspension hearing, testimony was elicited from the officer with respect to the above events, the officer was cross examined by defense counsel, closing arguments were heard and the suspension was subsequently rescinded due to a lack of probable cause to arrest client and taken down to the station for a breath test. As a result, client was back on the road driving the next day.

Result: Criminal case was subsequently dismissed following a review of the transcript from the administrative license suspension hearing.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Disclaimer: This article is intended to provide general, not specific, information about Maine law. The publication of this article does not constitute an attorney-client relationship between the author(s) and the reader(s).

Previous post:

Next post: