ARGUMENT

1.

Use your common sense WHEN YOU Watch the videotape and see for yourself. Look at Defendants demeanor. Look and you will see the CUES that I discussed with the Trooper ARE NOT present.

2.

3.

DWI DETECTION GUIDE [what you didnt see] Weaving Weaving across lane lines p=.50-.75 Straddling a lane line Swerving Turning with a wide radius Drifting Almost striking a vehicle or other object SPEED AND BRAKING PROBLEMS Stopping problems Accelerating or decelerating for no apparent reason Varying speed Slow speed (10+ mph under limit VIGILANCE PROBLEMS Driving in opposing lanes or wrong way on one-way Slow response to traffic signals Slow or failure to respond to officers signals

MAYBE, BUT LOOK AT THE PICTURE OF THE ROAD CONDITION? ISNT IT A SIGN OF HIS AWARENESS NOT IMPAIRMENT THAT HE DIDNT DRIVE OVER THIS DROP OFF AND PULLED IN A DRIVEWAY, THEN ASKED YOU IF OK? RIGHT. CALLED FAILURE TO COMPLY, NOT CITED, RIGHT?

 Stopping in lane for no apparent reason Driving without headlights at night* Failure to signal or signal inconsistent with action* USED SIGNAL, RIGHT? JUDGMENT PROBLEMS Following too closely Improper or unsafe lane change Illegal or improper turn (too fast, jerky, sharp, etc.) Driving on other than the designated roadway Stopping inappropriately in response to officer Inappropriate or unusual behavior (throwing, arguing, etc.) Appearing to be impaired

Difficulty with motor vehicle controls Difficulty exiting the vehicle Fumbling with drivers license or registration Repeating questions or comments Swaying, unsteady, or balance problems Leaning on the vehicle or other object Slurred speech Slow to respond to officer/officer must repeat Provides incorrect information, changes answers Odor of alcoholic beverage from the driver
4.

The Ten Post-stop cues are:

Cooperateddidnt stumble or sway..the only person was the TROOPER who lost his balance, Mr. Defendant didnt Refusal is his constitutional right to remain silentdont use that against the defendant. He did what he did due to HIS DISABILITY and then based on HIS ATTORNEYS ADVICE.

5. 6.

7.

Like or not, there isnt enough evidence to prove this case BEYOND a REASONABLE DOUBT you agreed that a mere suspicion, possibility, probability was not enough. No Evidence of impairment that adversely effected Defendants ability to operate motor vehicle. NOT GUILTY. THANK YOU.

8. 9.