Standardized Field Sobriety Test For DUI / Drunk Driving
A description of Standardized Field Sobriety Testing posted by a Florida lawyer representing clients
Statewide.*
Parks & Braxton,
P.A., your resource for a Florida DUI Lawyer, wants you to be well informed. Here is a basic description of Standardized Field Sobriety Testing:
The Standardized Field Sobriety Test (SFST) is a battery of three tests administered and evaluated in a standardized manner to obtain validated indicators of impairment and establish probable cause for arrest. These DUI tests were developed as a result of research sponsored by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and conducted by the Southern California Research Institute. A formal program of training was developed and is available through NHTSA to help police officers become more skillful at detecting drunk driving suspects, describing the behavior of these DUI suspects, and presenting effective testimony in court. Formal administration and accreditation of the program is provided through IACP.
The three DUI tests of the SFST are:
- The horizontal gaze nystagmus (HGN)
- The walk-and-turn
- The one-leg stand.
These drunk driving tests are administered systematically and are evaluated according to measured responses of the suspect.
Motorists suspected of DUI are routinely asked by police
officers to perform one or more field sobriety exercises. These voluntary
“tests” (yes, voluntary) were developed by police agencies to assist law
enforcement officers in making roadside determinations as to whether a motorist
is under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Through the performance of these
tests or evaluations, the officer subjectively determines how the motorist
reacts to and performs the requested tasks.
Almost EVERY knowledgeable
DUI attorney will say to you, “NO. Don’t attempt ANY
‘field tests’---EVER.” That is because many studies have concluded that the
SFSTs are “designed to fail”.
|

Police officer administering Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN) Evaluation
as part of a police arrest. Officer may use finger, penlight or other
object as the stimulus. |
Being charged with a DUI can be a traumatizing period of time
for anyone. Our team of DUI defense lawyers has the years of experience needed
to successfully resolve your case.
A motorist's alleged poor performance on field evaluations may provide the
“probable cause” (legal justification) an officer needs to arrest a person for
impaired driving and may also become part of the proof used to later convict the
person at trial.
Parks & Braxton, P.A. will challenge the subjective
nature of the evaluations, the accuracy of the principles behind the tests, the
accuracy of the administration of the tests, the credibility of the officer who
“requested” the tests, and challenge all circumstances connected with the
evaluations. In addition, our firm will attack the factual and legal
issues that may arise regarding the officer's scoring and evaluation of the
field tests.
Only three tests have been “scientifically” studied (in
lengthy studies paid for by the federal government) and represented to have any
measure of reliability in helping an officer predict whether a subject is above
a certain legal limit (0.10 BAC, in the original testing). These tests, known as
the “standardized field sobriety tests” [SFSTs], were designed pursuant to
numerous federal grants and ultimately sanctioned by NHTSA (the National Highway
Traffic and Safety Administration) beginning in 1984. These three tests are (1)
the walk and turn [WAT] test, (2) the one leg stand [OLS] test, and (3) the
horizontal gaze nystagmus [HGN] test. However, the manuals (plural here, because
6 separate versions have now been released) say that if not performed properly,
or if conducted without adhering to the training protocols, such actions
“compromise” the validity of these evaluations.
Starting in the 1970’s, NHTSA began studying and funding “field tests” to see if
any of the dozens of police exercises had any correlation to showing if a
drinking driver had a blood alcohol level of 0.10 grams percent or higher. The
“studies” determined that only the three named evaluations had any reliable
correlation better than 50-50 (flipping a coin and guessing ‘heads’, being a
50-50 reliability test, for example) to identify a person having a BAC of 0.10%
or more. These evaluations in no way were used to determine whether a driver is
impaired . . . only whether the person may be 0.10 or more.
The HGN evaluation, when performed correctly on proper
subjects, had a 77% “claimed” reliability rating. The WAT exercise, when
conducted properly on a qualified subject on a dry, level surface, was found to
be 68% reliable. The OLS exercise, when conducted properly, on a qualified
subject on a level, dry surface and under proper instructions and where
correctly demonstrated and scored, reportedly yields about 65% reliability.
Cumulatively, if all are done correctly, up to 83% correlation to a BAC of 0.10%
or more may be expected.
Knowledgeable criminal defense lawyers know that 98%
or more of the officers administering these evaluations do them wrong, or
conduct them in a manner (or on a test subject) not approved by the SFST manual,
or grade the evaluations improperly, as per the manual, or ALL OF THE ABOVE.
When done incorrectly, these evaluations have ZERO predicted reliability.
Recent research and scientific review of the testing
protocols and scoring methodology have brought the NHTSA “Standardized Field
Sobriety Tests (“SFSTs”) into serious question. Courts across America are taking
a closer look at the original research, to see if proper scientific methods were
employed in the initial research. More and more courts are now saying “no” to
these questions. In a recent New Mexico case, a high-level court has declared
that the person who “developed” the tests (Dr. Marcelline Burns) was not
qualified to testify as an expert witness about the scientific principles behind
the HGN test. (Lasworth v. State, 42 P.2d 844 (N.M. App. 2001).)
HISTORIC ROOTS
Prior to the 1980's and NHTSA's studies on field testing,
police officers across America were taught a wide variety of “tests” to be given
to persons stopped for suspected drunk driving. Most of these “tests” had never
been studied to determine “fairness” or accuracy in detecting either impaired
drivers or drivers who were operating a vehicle while their BAC level was 0.10
BAC or more. Moreover, no standardized method (that is, not being done the same
way by officers who used these tests) of scoring or grading these tests had been
attempted. Simply stated, the decision to arrest was based upon the subjective
whim of the officer. Mistakes were made in a large percentage of cases.
Tests given by some officers may have included reciting the
alphabet (or a portion thereof), picking up coins off the ground, or touching
index fingers to the tip of the nose while the person’s eyes were closed and
head tilted back. Some involved strange, one-legged tapping on the roadway with
a raised foot (similar to what that famous television horse, Mr. Ed, used to
do). These “made-up” tests were administered to subjects without any scientific
or empirical basis for reliability in detecting an impaired driver. These tests
were designed for failure, not for fairness. Even worse, police officers often
forced people to perform these voluntary evaluations, thereby violating these
citizens’ rights. Some “non-standardized” tests were so ridiculous and difficult
that proof of non-validity was easy with almost any jury or judge. Today,
officers who lack NHTSA training invariably cannot cite any studies or
scientific research which “validated” their tests, the scoring (e.g., “pass” or
“fail”) or their testing methods. Almost always, no scoring system is used on
tests which do not adhere to NHTSA guidelines. If non-standardized tests are
used, the number of errors that are required for a subject to fail is totally
subjective with each officer. Hence, the untrained officer is usually an easy
target for a skilled and knowledgeable criminal defense attorney who knows the
“limitations” of these field tests.
FLORIDA
DUI DEFENSE
SPEAK DIRECTLY TO A PARTNER
1-888-358-4962
Send E-mail to: info@FloridaDUIDefenders.com

Find out how you may be able to prevent your Florida DUI incident from lasting a lifetime...
Affordable Rates
Flexible Payment Plans
   
CREDIT CARDS ACCEPTED
The hiring of DUI lawyers / attorneys is an important decision for your DUI defense
and should not be based on advertising alone. Before you decide, ask us to send you
free written information about the qualifications and experience of our DUI defense
lawyers / attorneys at Parks & Braxton, P.A.
|