DUI & DWAI

In New York, the term DWI (Driving While Intoxicated) is typically used to refer to drunk driving offenses. However, New York also recognizes the offense of DWAI (Driving While Ability Impaired), which is a lesser offense that indicates a driver's ability to operate a vehicle has been impaired to any extent by alcohol or drugs. DWAI can be charged if a driver's BAC is above 0.05% but below 0.08%, or if other signs of impairment are observed by law enforcement.

DWI & DWAI cases are often less complex to resolve than other serious offenses. An attorney must create issues surrounding an officer’s methods and protocols to collect evidence against you. Beginning May 9, 2022, automatic discovery no longer applies to simplified traffic information concerning a traffic infraction charge. The best way to obtain the data is by filing a motion for disclosure, which will produce information needed to create issues and raise doubt about the veracity of tests that an officer administers and state-issued toxicology reports..

Once the people disclose the reports, there is much with which to work. The prosecution must establish a solid foundation to admit an alcohol breath test into evidence and prove the reliability of the test in question. The attorney’s job is to illuminate the discrepancies associated with the device officers use to measure a motorist’s BAC (Blood alcohol content). A breathalyzer is an indirect test because it uses electricity and chemicals to convert gas(breath) into a number, which supposedly represents one’s blood alcohol content. There are numerous issues with this test because it is only a test of convenience that is less accurate than a blood test, so often, the judge will suppress the test as an invalid form of evidence. Pursuant to 10 NYCRR 59.5, a margin of error exists along with a strict protocol regarding the percentage value and how the government must report specific data.

Furthermore, the system provides officers with training manuals, the contents of which they are expected to follow strictly. Suppose an officer deviates from the proper method of administering the test. In that case, an attorney can point out the flaws in the officer’s evaluation and application of his or her investigation, thereby weakening the prosecution’s argument. For example, an officer must properly calibrate the instrument and confirm that the suspect’s mouth is free and clear of any dental appliances, food, piercings, etc. If the officer fails to take any necessary steps before conveniently letting you blow into a tube, the odds are in your favor. Moreover, an attorney should always point out the possibility of environmental factors interfering with the procedure and science on which the prosecutor relies. Questions about partition ratio, temperature, re-testing, and timing will raise significant doubt concerning the reliability of this measuring tool.

An attorney best suited to handle DWI & DWAI cases is one with a strong knowledge of both the law and science. There are two things that a good lawyer must show. First, it is essential to expose the science behind the test for what it is– a test that assumes specific conditions for different people with different body compositions in different environments. Second, it is crucial to apply the law and downplay the seriousness of the test and its result. Imagine asking an officer on direct examination about his preferred testing tool in a more serious case involving injury or death. An officer’s affirmation that he or she would conduct an immediate blood withdrawal in a more serious case raises unquestionably reasonable doubt about the accuracy of the breath test. We work tirelessly to have our clients' charges dismissed and/or reduced, so call the Krut Law firm if you need help.