Every year police arrest tens of thousands in Minnesota and Wisconsin for drunk driving. But despite the frequency of these arrests, drunk driving cases remain complicated cases with a litany of legal and scientific issues. For instance, did police have authority to stop your car in the first place? Did police have authority to ask for a breath test? Did the government’s laboratory determine your blood alcohol content in a scientifically reliable way?
Christopher Bub defends against drunk driving charges routinely. He understands the legal and scientific issues in these cases, and he knows how to defend against these charges.
Below are some of his recent successes.
Drunk Driving Charges Involving An Accident Reduced To A Non-Criminal Traffic Violation
Christopher Bub’s client was charged with drunk driving, second offense, after police responded to a traffic accident. The government claimed Christopher’s client smelled like alcohol, had glassy eyes and performed poorly on field sobriety tests. Christopher demanded a motion hearing, arguing that police did not have sufficient evidence to subject his client to field sobriety tests. At the motion hearing, Christopher cross-examined the arresting officer, exposing discrepancies between the officer’s written report and an audio recording from the stop. Using that information, Christopher negotiated to have the criminal drunk driving charge reduced to a non-criminal traffic violation for reckless driving.
Driving While Intoxicated Charges Dropped After Defense Files Motions to Suppress
Christopher Bub’s client was charged with driving while under the influence of a drug. The government claimed that Christopher’s client was driving on the interstate without a license, speeding excessively, and swerving erratically. After conducting a traffic stop, police claimed to smell marijuana, and then put Christopher’s client through field sobriety tests, eventually arresting him for marijuana. Even after the government received laboratory test that were helpful to the defense, the government pressed forward with the case. In response, Christopher filed filed amended motions to suppress. Ultimately, the government agreed to drop the driving while under the influence charge.
Drunk Driving Charges Dismissed After Court Grants Defense’s Suppression Motion
Police stopped the car Christopher Bub’s client was driving shortly after midnight because it did not have license plates. After approaching the car, the officer suspected Christopher’s client was intoxicated. The officer had him perform field sobriety tests and had him take a breath test. According to the officer, the client failed the tests, and he was arrested for drunk driving. Christopher brought a motion to suppress the evidence, arguing the officer did not have enough evidence to request field sobriety tests or a breath test. The Court agreed and suppressed the evidence. Case dismissed.
Drunk Driving Charges Involving an Accident with a Child in the Car Reduced to a Non-Criminal Offense
Police responded to an incident in which Christopher Bub’s client allegedly drove a car into a ditch while intoxicated. The government claimed the client’s blood alcohol concentration was more than three times the legal limit and that there was a child in the car at the time of the accident. If convicted of the resulting criminal charges, the client would receive mandatory jail time. Christopher negotiated the reduction of the criminal charges to a non-criminal offense. As a result, the client was not convicted of a crime and served no jail time.