Driving while intoxicated is an offense that comes with hefty penalties ranging from a suspended license up to serious jail time. Intoxication can come in the form of many substances. With the consequences of a DWI being potentially fatal, law enforcement agencies have developed various ways of testing for aforementioned substances. Law enforcement employs various methods to identify intoxication by other substances in the field, each with its own strengths and limitations. But how accurate are these tests and how do they work?
Chemical Testing Methods
Breathalyzers are by far the most common methods of DWI testing and are used to measure the level of alcohol in a person’s blood. The way that breathalyzers operate is by looking for ethanol, which is an alcohol that is made when sugars ferment. Alcohol enters your circulation through absorption and then diffuses into your lungs after consumption. The breathalyzer calculates your blood alcohol content by measuring the amount of ethanol in your breath.
Another common chemical test is the blood test, which directly measures the amount of alcohol in a person’s blood. Blood tests are more accurate than breathalyzers, as they are not affected by factors such as recent breath mints or certain medical conditions. In most states, police officers must have probable cause in order to administer a blood test unless the driver is arrested following an accident.
Field Tests
In addition to chemical testing, officers may also conduct field sobriety tests (FSTs) to assess a driver’s level of intoxication. These tests are designed to measure a person’s coordination, balance, and mental alertness. Some common methods include the horizontal gaze nystagmus test, the walk-and-turn test, and the one-leg stand test.
Specially trained officers can also perform an evaluation that classifies someone as intoxicated by looking at physical signs and behaviors. However, research published in the Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs found that officers misclassified 22% of impaired drivers, highlighting the potential for inaccuracies.
Field sobriety tests have been scrutinized as unreliable and entirely arbitrary. FSTs rely heavily on officer training and subjective judgment. They are also often standardized for individuals accustomed to Western norms of balance and coordination. Cultural variations in movement patterns can lead to misinterpretations, raising concerns about inclusivity and fairness.
Variations in interpretation and scoring can lead to inconsistencies, potentially impacting the fairness of assessments. These limitations raise crucial questions about the fairness and accuracy of DWI charges based solely on field tests.
Roadside Drug Tests
In recent years, law enforcement has increasingly turned to roadside drug tests to detect the presence of illegal drugs in drivers’ systems. These tests, which typically involve taking a saliva or urine sample, are intended to provide a quick and easy way to identify drivers who may be under the influence of marijuana, cocaine, or other controlled substances.
A 2022 study in the Journal of Analytical Toxicology found that saliva tests had a 30% false-positive rate for cannabis, meaning they indicated drug presence even when individuals were not under the influence. Additionally, RDTs often only detect recent drug use, not necessarily current impairment.
The Legal Aspect
Navigating the complexities of DWI testing for non-alcohol substances presents unique legal challenges. The lack of standardized, reliable field tests for many drugs necessitates careful evaluation of all evidence, including SFST performance, drug history, and potential alternative explanations for observed behavior. With this comes the potential of being wrongfully convicted of a DWI and it is important to know your rights. This is where experienced legal counsel becomes invaluable. If you are facing DWI charges, a DWI attorney can help you develop a strong defense strategy.
DWI attorneys specializing in drug-related charges can:
- Challenge the validity of field test results: By questioning the accuracy of DAID or THC breathalyzers and highlighting limitations of SFSTs for drugs, they can cast doubt on the initial evidence.
- Advocate for blood test analysis: When available, pushing for blood tests can provide more definitive evidence, potentially challenging field test interpretations.
- Explore alternative explanations: Medical conditions, prescription medications, and even passive exposure to drugs can mimic intoxication. A skilled attorney can investigate these possibilities, building a compelling counter-narrative.
Conclusion
The accuracy of DWI testing methods, whether chemical, field-based, or roadside drug tests, is not infallible. While breathalyzers and blood tests provide measurable data, the reliability of field sobriety tests has been questioned, introducing concerns about fairness and accuracy. Roadside drug tests, while convenient, exhibit notable false-positive rates.
Navigating the legal implications of DWI charges involving non-alcohol substances requires a nuanced approach. A skilled DWI attorney specializing in drug-related cases can challenge test validity, advocate for more reliable blood tests, and explore alternative explanations for observed behavior. In the face of potentially life-altering consequences, securing experienced legal counsel becomes paramount to ensuring a fair and robust defense strategy.
