Washington State DUI Defenses

At Callahan Law, we work with our clients to determine all the facts surrounding the DUI to uncover DUI defense and the strategies that will be used in their defense.  Information that the client provides in our Confidential Client Questionnaire is often the lynchpin that gets our clients the result they want in their case.

Here is a list of just a few of the defenses we have used, but you should know that the defenses to a DUI are virtually unlimited.  However, only the most knowledgeable DUI lawyers will understand how many of the issues below can result in a happy ending for your case.  In every case, we apply our training, in-depth knowledge, skill and experience.  Often, we exceed the expectations of our clients—when the case is tough, we get tougher, using creative and innovative approaches.

• Unlawful stop
• Speeding—visual evidence of speed--no radar or laser—pace with speedometer not certified—radar or laser not properly certified or maintained
• Crossing painted lines—lines not visible—single cross not an offense—obstacle in roadway
• Turning into far lane—not unlawful when exiting a private driveway, only from an intersection
• Spinning or squealing tires insufficient cause alone
• Mud flaps and other equipment “violations”
• License plate lamp sufficiently illuminated
• Cracked windshields—vision not obstructed
• Rear view mirror—vision not obstructed
• High beams used appropriately
• Weaving—within the lane is not a violation
• City laws differ from state law and state law not adopted
• Cell phone usage—not in violation of technical requirements
• Pulled safely off the roadway before being pursued by law enforcement
• Unlawful arrest
• No probable cause to believe defendant was driving
• No probable cause to believe defendant was driving while under the influence
• Bloodshot eyes not an indicator of impairment
• Admission to a drink not sufficient indicator of impairment
• Odor of alcohol—not isolated to driver—not indicative of quantity consumed—not isolated to breath
• Field Sobriety Tests:
• Tests do not prove driving impairment
• Tests do not prove a particular BAC level
• Tests not performed
• Not administered as required by procedures standardized by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
• Not administered by an officer trained in the NHTSA standardized procedures
• Not properly “scored” by the officer according to NHTSA guidelines
• Driver not questioned about eye problems or injuries before eye test
• Driver not questioned about physical problems or disabilities that might affect test performance
• Officer asked questions but did not take physical injuries or disabilities into consideration
• Breath Testing
• Test inaccurate or unreliable due to physical condition—diabetes—acid reflux—acetaldehyde—candida albicans—dental devices, cavities or gum conditions—foreign object in mouth—chew—gum—mint—food particles—vomit or regurgitation of stomach contents or gases--fever
• Test inaccurate or unreliable due to chemical exposures that are not differentiated from alcohol –acetone—MEK—toluene—paints—solvents—thinners—gasoline—floor refinishing chemicals—hair dye chemicals—air bag dust—diethyl either, etc…
• Test not accurate due to breath test equipment malfunction---device not calibrated—not properly calibrated—components not properly calibrated or certified
• Test not admissible—implied consent warnings not given—inaccurate—misleading—officer added non-statutory information that misled driver
• Test “refusal” not admissible due to a physical condition affecting ability to give a valid sample—COPD—asthma—panic disorder—crying uncontrollably—faulty mouthpiece—5 way valve improperly activated—person given wrong instruction on how to blow—blowing too hard
• Test not accompanied by measures of uncertainty
• Samples do not agree within plus or minus ten percent of their mean
• Machine malfunction—invalid sample—incomplete sample—ambient fail—pump error—missing database—machine should have been taken out of service but was not
• A sample is within the manufacturer’s margin of error making it under the limit
• Presence of radio frequency interference during testing—presence of electrical or grounding issues
• Mouthpiece not changed between samples
• Mouth not checked 16 minutes before test started—person not observed within that time to ensure put nothing in his or her mouth
• Blood Testing
• Blood test not authorized under statute
• Blood implied consent warnings not given—inaccurate—misleading—officer added information that was not in statute
• No reasonable grounds to suspect drugs for blood test
• No reasonable grounds to suspect vehicular assault basis for blood testing
• Blood draw not properly done—injection area not cleaned properly—vials not filled with proper amounts of sodium fluoride or anticoagulant—butterfly needle used causing hemolysis—no vacuum—vials shaken by phlebotomist or officer
• Blood vials not properly stored and refrigerated before testing
• Blood analysis not reliable—insufficient blood drawn—gas chromatograph not properly maintained or repaired—protocols for analysis not followed or not sufficient to protect against inaccurate unreliable results
• Test result not accompanied by measures of uncertainty
• Other
• Accident scene with more people present than needed to drive vehicles and insufficient proof the accused was driving one of them while under the influence

This list is not exhaustive by any means and is merely representative of some of the more common issues we examine given the facts of each client’s case.  If you have been arrested for DUI in Washington, our DUI lawyers know the defenses that may apply in your case and will leave no stone unturned in an effort to find the thread that will unravel the prosecution’s case.  Give us a call or submit an online evaluation request now.