Two cases are worth considering for anyone who is concerned about being stopped for a DUI in the state of Florida. Both cases have similarities, yet have had quite different outcomes, so far. The timing of the two arrests is interesting, both within 30 days of each other, as reported in the article at www.Jacksonville.com/news. Yet both had totally different outcomes. Each case had a core commonality, refusal to submit to DUI testing.

 

It is not uncommon for people to refuse submitting to a breath test when stopped by police for a suspected DUI. Whether it happens a lot or not is not at issue. It seems what is at issue is whether one can be compelled to do so, given the current writing and application of Florida law. However, being forced to submit to the test may seem rather harsh. This occurred to two people last year, according to an article by Paul Pinkham on June 18, 2009 at Jacksonville.com/News. The article is entitled Duval judges don’t agree on blood draws for DUI suspects. A circuit judge is now assigned to settle the issue.

 

To summarize it, one could characterize it as it is possible that issuing a warrant to take blood may occur is certain and it is uncertain whether the results will be suppressed or not by a judge. In this article there were similarities from what Pinkham reported, but he said there ere not many. Every case is different and has different fact patterns affecting its outcome. Among legal professionals the term fact pattern is commonly use in the course of their work when referring to the facts and how there are arranged.

 

In one case the judge found the forced taking of blood to violate Florida law. He then suppressed it as evidence. In the other case the forced taking of blood was allowed and accepted it as evidence. In the first case when the evidence was suppressed the prosecutors appealed the ruling, as a matter of course.

 

An appellate judge has been assigned to sort this out. It will be interesting to see how the issue of the forced removal of bodily fluids is considered by the courts in Florida. It can go many ways and leave both cases as they currently stand. The question that seems to beg for uniformity is when is it OK to refuse the test, and when isn’t it? Anyone who has ever had a few drinks, then driven, and is concerned if they will be at risk will most likely be keeping an ear to the wind for what the judge determines.

 

Other opinions may be found in the judiciary. It also may be possible there is current case law for attorneys on both sides of the issue to argue and use. The result will be interesting and affect many lives. Other judges will surely have diverse viewpoints on this important issue. An appeal is certain regardless of what the decision is made from the new judge.
How will this affect Florida drivers? One can only guess. Since Florida drivers seem to be able to refuse these tests, what the final outcome will be is up in the air; even with the implied consent in Florida law. Other states have implied consent features in their driving laws.

 

Florida will have a new ruling on the issue of forced evidence taking in misdemeanor cases soon, regardless. Perhaps an issue that will be argued and considered is where do the boundaries of evidence begin and end?