More disturbing signs of Amerika the Police State

[lead_magnet]

LEO can chime in, but this is straight from my 1SGTreserve/CSP( former unit) ........ he said gents if you know you are fucked and gonna lose your TS/SCI, you did it to yourself by drinking 10 beers now, if you are only at a few beers and the cop is being a dick and you might get a DUI, only crack your window 1/2 inch to hand over documents and roll it back up. If they want to give you a test... Don't. He said he would rather us call him and tell him we got arrested hours later for resisting arrest than a DUI. Would LEO break windows to get you out?

This is not the best of advice... if you're being stopped it is for a reason (at least in theory), if the officer feels that it is nessesary to contact you, not just your driver license, than he will do so, if you "obstruct" his investigation by placing a barrier between the two of you aftering being told not to then you will probably be arrested for obstruction or interference (depending on state), and if he has to breach a window to enact his arrest then the same result will be achieved, but you'll be paying for a window too.

[ShelbyJK500]

Does the getting a DL over ride your 5th amendment rights ?

Where in the world are 5th Amendment rights coming into this? Your 5th Amendment right has EVERYTHING to do with spoken testimony/statements, and NOTHING to do with the collection/preservation of evidence to which probable cause exists to obtain. This is why search warrants are easily obtained in the cases in question. Probable cause already existed for the arrest...so the collection and/or preservation of evidence necessarily becomes the next logical step. NO due process is being violated, NOR any rights. I'm not saying I am completely on board with this blanket policy for refusals in this particular county...but it certainly doesn't fall outside the scope of criminal procedure and say that America is headed toward a police state.

Also, just my editorial...the submission to chemical testing is also considered exculpatory evidence. Which is; evidence that could prove your innocence. The main reason why Express Consent is required when obtaining a license is that there should be no reason for refusing a test to be taken unless you are guilty of the crime. If you are charged with a crime and there is evidence out there which could prove you innocent of the charge...would you not DEMAND it's collection?!? Of course if you knew there was evidence of the crime out there which could prove your guilt, you would want to distance yourself from it as far as possible. In either case, no matter which side you are on it is a matter of DUTY by any entity investigating a crime to collect and preserve any and all evidence that would serve either purpose.

This topic is truly ALL about evidence collection and NOT about the loss or violation of rights. If this were occurring without a search warrant in misdemeanor cases I would be on board with a discussion of rights violations.

[Ronin13]

Probable cause already existed for the arrest...so the collection and/or preservation of evidence necessarily becomes the next logical step. NO due process is being violated, NOR any rights. I'm not saying I am completely on board with this blanket policy for refusals in this particular county...but it certainly doesn't fall outside the scope of criminal procedure and say that America is headed toward a police state.

I think the point being argued here is that a checkpoint or traffic stop based solely on time of day and day of week does not constitute probable cause. "You were driving between midnight and two thirty AM on a Friday, probability suggests that you're returning from a bar." That's not probable cause, that's an educated, yet unproven, guess. DUI Checkpoints are dragnets, the only proof that someone is drunk driving is provided after the contact, and is not the cause for the contact. I am in no way arguing either way because I'm still formulating my opinion, but I do disagree with the lack of due process for a DUI checkpoint.

[ShelbyJK500]

I think the point being argued here is that a checkpoint or traffic stop based solely on time of day and day of week does not constitute probable cause. "You were driving between midnight and two thirty AM on a Friday, probability suggests that you're returning from a bar." That's not probable cause, that's an educated, yet unproven, guess. DUI Checkpoints are dragnets, the only proof that someone is drunk driving is provided after the contact, and is not the cause for the contact. I am in no way arguing either way because I'm still formulating my opinion, but I do disagree with the lack of due process for a DUI checkpoint.

Not to be rude....but I have no idea what you're talking about here. Someone might have mentioned DUI checkpoints, but that isn't the topic AT ALL. This has nothing to do with a DUI stop in the daytime or peoples interpretation of DUI checkpoints. This topic is all about what occurs after an arrest is made based on probable cause for a DUI arrest. This is about the OP's original topic and the perceived "rights violations" versus "evidence preservation." At least that is what I have gleaned through the 3 pages of posts. Just my .02