Some people out there are simply bad drivers. They have trouble maneuvering smoothly, remaining in their lanes, and staying focused enough to avoid swerving at the last minute to make their appropriate turns. Then there are those people who are actually good drivers 99% percent of the time, but whose navigational skills tend to deteriorate rapidly when alcohol is introduced into the mix. After all, the right amount of alcohol can turn the most coordinated person in the world into a stumbling fool and a dangerous driver all at the same time.
Since it can sometimes be difficult for the average police officer to tell the difference between bad driving and drunk driving, the law requires a thorough evaluation of those thought to be driving while under the influence before a conviction can be sealed. Therefore, it’s not enough for an officer to simply observe a driver while on the road or even over the course of a field sobriety test. Rather, some sort of blood alcohol test must be given in order to determine if a person is actually drunk, or just plain tired, uncoordinated, or a combination of both.
When it comes to blood alcohol levels, the law is pretty clear across all 50 states: Anyone caught driving around with a blood alcohol concentration of .08% or more is considered to have been driving under the influence. Since that .08% mark is pretty well-known, most people are therefore of the impression that as long as they’re never caught driving with blood alcohol levels that high, they can never be convicted of DUI. Charles Nistico of the firm Nistico Roberts, P.C. is a Pennsylvania-based DUI attorney with more than 30 years of experience under his belt, and according to him, this line of thinking is actually quite flawed. In fact, Nistico thinks that folks ought to be aware that a person can actually be charged with and convicted of DUI even if his blood alcohol level comes in at .07% or lower.
How can this be? The purpose of measuring one’s blood alcohol level over the course of a DUI investigation is not necessarily to help him prove his innocence, but rather, to solidify a case against him. If a prosecutor can point to the fact that a person was observed to have been driving recklessly and was found to have had a blood alcohol level of .09% at the time, then that data can only help build a stronger case against him. However, the law does not insist on a blood alcohol concentration reading of .08% in order to convict someone of DUI. As long as a person has enough alcohol in his system to clearly impair his driving ability, then he can be charged with and convicted of DUI regardless of what his blood alcohol level actually is.
Of course, if a person’s blood alcohol level ends up coming in below the .08% mark during a DUI investigation, then his attorney does have a much better chance of getting him off the hook for the charge – especially if the test reading indicates a level that is clearly below .08%. However, those suspected of DUI should not be so quick to take comfort in the fact that their blood alcohol levels might fall just short of the dreaded .08% mark. According to Nistico, there have been plenty of instances in his state, and in others, where a DUI conviction was entered despite a blood alcohol test reading of less than .08%.
If you’ve been charged with DUI, then it’s important that you find an experienced, educated lawyer to help you come away with the best possible outcome given the circumstances involved. After all, it’s foolish to bank on the fact that your blood alcohol test levels might technically come in below the legal limit. Remember, when it comes to DUI convictions, your blood alcohol concentration is only one of the factors involved in establishing a case against you.
This article is for informational purposes only. You should not rely on this article as a legal opinion on any specific facts or circumstances, and you should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Publication of this article and your receipt of this article does not create an attorney-client relationship.
