Legal Help DUI

[Maritime Q-Scout]

I don't know enough about the Alberta statutes (in fact I don't know anything) to comment in any way shape or form. I am reading the threat with interest, and thanked hockeycop's post above because he's clearly being impartial.

Judging by the way the thread has gone we can safely assume that hockeycop is an officer of the law, and it shows good character to say "you might have a grounds for appeal here".

Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with thesmugger I think calling it down the middle is exactly the stance our police officers should have when they patrolling the streets.

[thesmugger]

Originally Posted by psicodude

It has been posted several times in this thread. They don't have to make you blow if you have a GDL. They just have to smell alcohol. It appears your only choice is to file an appeal, or maybe hire a lawyer to advise you to file the appeal.

If I were you, I wouldn't do either as they are a waste of money. The law here seems pretty black and white...ZERO tolerance for alcohol. All that the officer has to say is that he smelled it on your breathe and you are screwed. If he really wants to make you look stupid, he will use the EMS guy as a witness.

If you honestly feel like you have been wronged here, then file the appeal.

so hockeycop is wrong in saying a breathilzer must be issued? For the time being i'm going to go with what he says. I understand there is zero tolorance, but there is no record of me going over 0

[algernon]

Originally Posted by thesmugger

so hockeycop is wrong in saying a breathilzer must be issued? For the time being i'm going to go with what he says. I understand there is zero tolorance, but there is no record of me going over 0

If the cop noted that you admitted drinking, that would be recorded in his notes. What am I missing?

[BlackArcher101]

Originally Posted by thesmugger

so hockeycop is wrong in saying a breathilzer must be issued? For the time being i'm going to go with what he says. I understand there is zero tolorance, but there is no record of me going over 0

Go ahead, take what he says. So far he's in the minority opinion and admitted to not actually being a cop. But I guess it's a sliver of hope for you.

So what will you be doing first thing Monday?

[psicodude]

Originally Posted by thesmugger

so hockeycop is wrong in saying a breathilzer must be issued? For the time being i'm going to go with what he says. I understand there is zero tolorance, but there is no record of me going over 0

I haven't read every post in this thread and am not a lawyer. I was posting this based upon what was said in the first few pages of this thread. It was posted by hockeycop himself that a 30 day suspension can be given if the officer smells alcohol.

At the end of the day, this is just a forum on the internet. If you feel that you were given the suspension in error, then grow a set and either hire a lawyer or file the appeal.

I will be interested in what happens.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by psicodude

It was posted by hockeycop himself that a 30 day suspension can be given if the officer smells alcohol.

I'd call B.S. on that (not saying that you personally are psicodude just that you happen to be the most recent person to say this).

If I'm under the GDL, am a designated driver at a house party, and in the process of being at the party have alcohol spilled on me. If pulled over, or at a check point an officer will smell alcohol, if it's late perhaps my eyes would be bloodshot (and let's face it, driving annoying drunks around you're going to be agitated and not in your best state). So in this scenario I lose my licence for 30 days and have a charge against me which will effect my insurance despite the fact I didn't drink anything, because an officer smelled alcohol?

What if at the party I mistakenly took a sip of alcohol (I didn't realize the punch was spiked), it's been several hours later, but I'd be lying if when asked if I had any alcohol if I said "no". Again, I lose my licence?

I would think that the breathalyser is a must.

In the case of thesmuggler we're not dealing with a balance of probabilities (which most people have been arguing) but beyond a reasonable doubt, which with the question "why wasn't he given a breathalyser test?" he *might* have. Again I'm not a lawyer, I don't know how the provincial laws work in Alberta.


At the risk of sounding too much like an east coast liberal hippie, if he was drinking & driving, he should be hung by this thumbs and stabbed with rusty nails.

[hockeycop]

Just in case I wasn't clear earlier, when I said it can be issued simply for smell, I was thinking of S.89 (24 hour suspension). Based on the TSA legislation itself, a S.90 (30 day novice driver suspension) can only be issued after a blood or breath test shows that there is infact alcohol present in the persons blood.

Based on that, and that alone, it appears that this suspension was issued as a result of an "error in law". This means that the Cst misapplied a piece of legislation. I am not talking about some chicken-sh*t spelling error on a summons or ticket, but actually applying the law incorrectly. This is why I believe there may be grounds for an appeal.

I am using my training and experience in navagating through Federal and American Legislation and figuring out exactly what it is saying.

*This is all dependent on the OP telling us the full story and not leaving things out (ie: a refusal).

I don't want to say who I work for on the Interweb... It is not the CPS though. I am trained and authorized by my agency on how to handle Impaired Drivers (and all Federal Criminal Matters) and have the authority to lay charges under the CCC. I do not typically handle provincial or municipal legislation or by-laws.

[psicodude]

^ As 7 pages of this thread painfully pointed out, none of us know the details of what happened that night. I was just repeating what another posted (that appears to be very credible) on page 5:

Originally Posted by hockeycop

30 day suspension - This case. GDL driver with any detectable alcohol in his system while operating a motor veh. This one can be tricky... I will edit this post with more info when I get a minute (I am at work)
Ok more on the 30 day, they can be issued to:

Any driver with a Learner’s or Probationary licence under GDL who:
· is found to have consumed alcohol before driving

· failed or refused to provide a breath sample.

Edit: I see hockeycop has clarified his post above. I was not aware of this early. My bad.

So, pay the money and appeal it already.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by hockeycop

I don't want to say who I work for on the Interweb... It is not the CPS though. I am trained and authorized by my agency on how to handle Impaired Drivers (and all Federal Criminal Matters) and have the authority to lay charges under the CCC. I do not typically handle provincial or municipal legislation or by-laws.

So the local hockey rink trained you on how to take down a drunk zamboni driver so you can apply a citizens arrest? Coolest referee ever!

[hockeycop]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

So the local hockey rink trained you on how to take down a drunk zamboni driver so you can apply a citizens arrest? Coolest referee ever!

HAHAHAHA! Hockey reffing is NOT my career! I wish it was sometimes... But it's not...

Although it would be bad ass to skate around tazing coaches who back talk!


**Disclaimer - Tazer joke is merely in good fun. At no point in my career have I misused any use of force options on a subject who did not demonstrate the subject behaviour necessary for an escalation of force.

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by hockeycop

None of those things will help the "horizintal gaze test". Alcohol causes jerky movements of the eyes.

Wasn't trying to advertise a system there, but it sure helps.

Is the jerky eye thing really that prevelant?

[thesmugger]

I'm not leaving out any details

On the notice of suspention sheet I got

there is a) a breath sample indicates that alchoal was present in your blood

This was left blank abs unchecked


B) you, without a resonable exucuse, failed or refused to provide a breath sample as request

Written here are two notes

- strong smell of alcohol on breath
- admission to consumption of vodka. Prior to driving


This box was also left unchecked.

[squiggs96]

Originally Posted by thesmugger

so hockeycop is wrong in saying a breathilzer must be issued? For the time being i'm going to go with what he says. I understand there is zero tolorance, but there is no record of me going over 0

Just answer this: Were you drinking before you got behind the wheel and drove with a GDL? To clarify, by before I mean within the last couple of hours, not 10 days before. If you know there is a zero tolerance, why are you trying to buck the system if you were wrong? If you admit it, it's easier to deal with. If you hadn't been drinking, it's an easier process to deal with.

[hockeycop]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

Wasn't trying to advertise a system there, but it sure helps.

Is the jerky eye thing really that prevelant?

Get a buddy over, have him throw back a couple. Take a pen and hold it just above his eyes so he is looking up at it. Move it slowly from side to side. A sober person, it will be a fluid smooth motion. With alcohol present, the eyes will go in spurts. It is pretty obvious.

[Antithesis]

Given the history of the rest of this thread, I seriously doubt you're going to get a straight answer.

[hockeycop]

Originally Posted by thesmugger

I'm not leaving out any details

On the notice of suspention sheet I got

there is a) a breath sample indicates that alchoal was present in your blood

This was left blank abs unchecked


B) you, without a resonable exucuse, failed or refused to provide a breath sample as request

Written here are two notes

- strong smell of alcohol on breath
- admission to consumption of vodka. Prior to driving


This box was also left unchecked.

There it is. The only 2 reasons under this law that the suspension can be issued were not fulfilled. This is an error in law. That is why that appeal right is there.

[frinkprof]

Thesmugger:

1. Now that the heat of debate in this thread has died down a bit, could you answer a question purely for my own (and probably others') curiosity? Why did the ambulance follow you, and call the cops on you? Did they or the cops give you a reason why they suspected you may have been impaired? Did you even have any sort of conversation with the EMS? Did they tell you to stay where you were until the cops arrived? I'm just trying to get a clearer picture of the incident in my head.

2. Thanks for changing your signature. I'm sure you didn't mean it to be annoying, but it's just that there was just a lot of movement and it was hard to read the body of any posts surrounding your's if it was on the screen because it distracted the eyes.

[wooohooo]

Originally Posted by hockeycop

I don't want to say who I work for on the Interweb... It is not the CPS though. I am trained and authorized by my agency on how to handle Impaired Drivers (and all Federal Criminal Matters) and have the authority to lay charges under the CCC. I do not typically handle provincial or municipal legislation or by-laws.

Agency you say... if you were American I would suspect DEA. Do we have something like that in Canada?

[Mightyfire89]

Originally Posted by thesmugger

I still don't understand this. I guess a lawyer is my best bet, just made this thread orginally opening someone had first hand experence. I know what I dd was wrong guys. Don't see the problem in trying to save my ass if I can

Of course you are fully within your rights to check into this further and if, because the cop neglected to check the "fail/refuse to provide breath sample" you are successful in your appeal, good for you, the cop should have known better/been more thorough.

Whatever happens, I hope you are one of the smart ones that takes this as a good lesson and you exercise extreme caution when operating a motor vehicle in the future. While you are a GDL driver, just don't drink at all before driving. When you get a full class 5, I would advise sticking to the same rule, but it's your choice.

[thesmugger]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Krack Korn

Of course you are fully within your rights to check into this further and if, because the cop neglected to check the "fail/refuse to provide breath sample" you are successful in your appeal, good for you, the cop should have known better/been more thorough.

Whatever happens, I hope you are one of the smart ones that takes this as a good lesson and you exercise extreme caution when operating a motor vehicle in the future. While you are a GDL driver, just don't drink at all before driving. When you get a full class 5, I would advise sticking to the same rule, but it's your choice.

It's not even a question of him forgetting to check the box. I never was even asked to try the test. And if I did refuse I'm sure there would have been a note made on this or a ticket? Hockeycop, from your knowledge there would have been a note made as their copy is the same as
mine.