Procedure questions

[Dtamer]

So last month I was pulled over for speeding. No problem there, but I was just curious about couple things the officer did.


In a nutshell it went down like this: He pulled out when I passed him on the highway, and without turning on his lights he followed me for about 2min. He then turned on his lights and pulled me over.

He pulled me out of my car for a sobriety test after I admitted to having a drink several hours prior. He did the follow the pen, walk heel-to-toe, and hold your leg up tests. While he was conducting the tests a 2nd officer pulled up and began assembling what I assume was breathalyzer test. After I finished the last test, he told the other officer they didn't need it, and the 2nd officer left.


My first question: Why did he follow me without turning on his lights? Why didn't he pull me over immediately? Was he trying to see if was driving erratically?

Second: Obviously I must have passed the tests, I'm just wondering if I passed all three? I doubt 2/3 would be acceptable?

[ChesCopPodz]

Pacing you so he can testify to your speed is my best guess. Possibly you were weaving slightly so he was watching your driving behavior to testify to your driving if he had arrested you for DUI

We have no idea how many you passed. It's perfectly possible to not get arrested failing a test. Some people get nervous and bomb the alphabet test but pass the others. Others don't have good balance so they suck at standing on one foot even completely sober. That's why we do multiple tests, to make sure the failing is due to alcohol/drugs.

[Citicop]

The decision to arrest for DWI should NOT be made solely as a result of the SFST's. It is the totality of the officer's observations that lead him to conclude that you are impaired that should be the deciding factor.

We (Missouri SFST Instructors) no longer consider the SFST's pass/fail. There are a certain number of clues that can be said to be scientifically correlated to impairment at a BAC of .08 or greater, but you don't "fail" the tests (as of my last training on the subject).

Citicop.

[scott715us]

The decision to arrest for DWI should NOT be made solely as a result of the SFST's. It is the totality of the officer's observations that lead him to conclude that you are impaired that should be the deciding factor.

We (Missouri SFST Instructors) no longer consider the SFST's pass/fail. There are a certain number of clues that can be said to be scientifically correlated to impairment at a BAC of .08 or greater, but you don't "fail" the tests (as of my last training on the subject).

Citicop.

Well put.

Totality of circumstances = whether the officer feels he has probable cause to arrest for DUI.

You may have shown some clues during the Field Sobriety Tests, but not enough (along with the other evidence) that the officer felt that you were driving impaired.

[Dtamer]

Interesting. The only thing I can think of was that he was just taking more time because he was having trouble reading my plate, it had a plastic cover on it that got bleached by the sun (actually he cited me for it, but I appealed and it was waived). I don't know if any of this is relevant, but it was about 1:30AM and I was the only car on the road.

I'll guess I'll never know how many of the SFST's I passed, ah well.

Thanks for the answers everyone.

[Plazoo]

I'll guess I'll never know how many of the SFST's I passed, ah well.

You passed enough not to have been arrested....that's all I'd need to know if I was in your spot. :rolleyes:

[Dtamer]

You passed enough not to have been arrested....that's all I'd need to know if I was in your spot. :rolleyes:

Right, but it's not all I want to know ;) Maybe I should have asked the officer himself :rolleyes:

[scott715us]

Any type of covering over or around the license plate that obstructs it in any way is citable (and upheld) offense in TN.

As I mentioned before, it was not a pass/fail situation. You simply did not show enough clues during the FSTs (and/or evidence) to indicate to the officer you were impaired.

[Dtamer]

Any type of covering over or around the license plate that obstructs it in any way is citable (and upheld) offense in TN.

As I mentioned before, it was not a pass/fail situation. You simply did not show enough clues during the FSTs (and/or evidence) to indicate to the officer you were impaired.

It was clear when it was originally put on by my parents (car is theirs), it was meant to keep the plate from rusting. The officer at the appeal asked me if it was removed, and I held it up to show him. Case closed

Thanks again for the answers.