Implied Consent.

[DrivenMind]

I headed to court in a few hours, to supposedly have my case dismissed. Due to the following on behalf of the Kennesaw City Police Department.

They did not have probable cause to pull me over in the first place.
They did not read me my rights, before using my testimony as grounds for self incrimination.
They detained me illegally.

Now here's my big question. Due to implied consent, my drivers license is currently suspended. But I did not openly refuse a field sobriety test, I asked the police officer, "well if you're just going to arrest me anyway, why should I?" to which they responded "just cuff him" and I was not offered a Breathalyzer.

So now I'm wondering if I can get my license back when I go to court today, due to the fact that whole thing has been thrown out. According to Implied Consent you have 10 days to get a lawyer, and contest the charges against you. Unfortunately it took me much longer than that to have my case moved to Cobb, and obtain a court appointed lawyer. So what do you think? If the case is being dismissed due to officer misconduct, should I probe the judge and see if she can repeal the license suspension? Any ideas or thoughts on this subject would be greatly appreciated.

[DrivenMind]

This is something interesting I just found on the subject.

"If a driver loses her or his license after refusing to comply with a chemical test (which I did not do) and a court later finds that reasonable grounds for the test did not exist (they didn't), the court can invalidate the revocation or suspension of the license."

[stephen]

i don't really have an answer to your question...but i'd suggest asking an attorney what you should do BEFORE you go. give this guy a call and just tell him you have a question (and one of his clients told you to call):

troy hendricks
404-373-8000

he used to be a dekalb county solicitor (now works has a personal attorney mostly for traffic tickets in dekalb county), so i'm pretty sure he'll be able to answer your question & give you some good court advice. good luck mang!

[DrivenMind]

Will do. I have an attorney, but he hasn't really explained what's going on with my license through out all of this. Im a little worried that after the case gets dismissed, he's gonna call it quits, and I'll still be stuck with a year suspension.

[stephen]

well, i'd imagine if the case is dismissed...then you should be able to get your license back. the only way they'd be able to keep it, is if the "refusal to submit to test" charge sticks.

if they relieve you of ALL charges, then i'd be curious as to how you're going to get your license back??? would you have to re-apply? do you have to pay re-instatement fees? anyhow, that lawyer i gave you should be able to answer those questions for you (or atleast your own lawyer).

[stephanie]

If your lawyer isn't answering your questions (that is their job) then I would have concerns about that. I have never had a DUI. But during my divorce I had to do a LOT of my own research. My lawyer sucked.

[DrivenMind]

Case was dismissed. All charges were dropped.

Epic Win.

[alpine_aw11]

There would have been no legal way for them to keep your license if the charges were dropped anyway.....

[Evil Goat]

haha, and your license?

[DrivenMind]

We'll see about the license. They treat implied consent as a separate issue, but I have to prove to DDS that because there was not probable cause for the stop, I should be able to get my license back.

[collins]

good luck mang

[The Ninja]

"well if you're just going to arrest me anyway, why should I?"

That sounds like something you would say in response to being offered a breathalyzer, and if thats the case your whole argument is invalidated.

[DrivenMind]

That sounds like something you would say in response to being offered a breathalyzer, and if thats the case your whole argument is invalidated.

It said in response to a field sobriety test. They have to have a chemical test to prove DUI, and if they didn't have cause to stop the vehicle then is reasonable grounds to assume the test was unwarranted.