The underpinning for the court's holding in
DPS v. Raffaelli are two cases from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals from the late 1980s which held that a suspect has no right to confer with counsel on the decision whether to give breath because "the time at which an accused is faced with the decision of whether to submit to a breath test is not a 'critical stage' of the criminal process which necessitates either the prior consultation or presence of counsel...."
McCambridge v. State, 778 S.W.2d 70, 72 (Tex. Crim. App. 1989) (quoting
Forte v. State, 759 S.W.2d 128 (Tex. Crim. App. 1988).
I differ with the court that the decision of whether to give evidence that could be used as prima facie proof of guilt or non-guilt regarding an offense for which a person can be jailed for 180 days is not a "critical stage" of the criminal process. But this is still the law in Texas, for bad or good. It's bad an American can't talk to a lawyer whenever they want to be informed of their rights, but I guess it's good from an efficiency standpoint. Preservation of rights always seems to create inefficiency. The courts should just make it clear that any invocation of the right to counsel by a suspect should bar the police from continuing to question a suspect, which is a basic doctrine in criminal law.
My advice to my clients is, if you have consumed any alcohol within 12 hours of being asked to give breath, then refuse to give breath. If you haven't had a drink within 12 hours, blow away. Of course, with only a handful of exceptions, every client I've had with a DWI case in 25 years had consumed alcohol near the time they were stopped. The problem is the client who had been drinking but who wasn't falling down drunk thinking their blood-alcohol content was below 0.08 and that they can "beat" the breathalyzer. Those are the clients who are surprised and chagrined when they blow 0.08 or 0.09.
So my rule, restated simply, is:
DON'T BLOW!
When you do get pulled over, you answer NO, to all questions about weather you drink, anything they ask you is used as evidence and you dont have to say anything.always be calm and polite, but you never have to elaborate no matter how much they degrade and badger you .remain silent.
Originally Posted by JONBALLS
I agree with nearly everything you wrote, except the part about answering "no" to every question. Under Texas law, a driver during a traffic stop is required to produce their valid driver's license and proof of insurance -- that's it. The driver doesn't have to give any other information or answer any questions. So why lie and answer "no" to a question when you don't have to say anything? Just STFU. What I do when I'm being questioned by LE is I cock my head a little, smile, and say nothing. Try it some time -- it works.
I think some states allow you to drive on this Receipt up to 24 hours past your first court hearing.
* * *
If it is a first pay the fines, take the Diversion that will probably be offered and get it expunged at the first opportunity.
Originally Posted by jframe2
The law is a little different in Texas. When a driver's license is confiscated for a breath or blood test refusal, the officer gives the driver a temporary driving permit that's good for 40 days. On the 41st day, the 180-day suspension period begins.
Also, records regarding an arrest for DWI cannot be expunged or sealed in Texas unless the case is dismissed or the defendant is acquitted at trial.