Is Refusing a Blood, Breath, or Urine Test Ever a Good Idea?

There are two questions that every DUI scholar hears often: “Is there ever a situation where it is to your advantage to refuse a blood-alcohol test?” and “Can the police force me to submit to a test?”

While we’d never advise refusing a field sobriety test, or driving while under the influence of drugs or alcohol in general, in some circumstances, it makes sense from a legal strategic standpoint to refuse a blood, breath, or urine test. Of course, this judgment call will have to be made by you while you are under the influence, which means you’ll probably screw it up.

]]>
So, let’s say you are definitely above the legal limit. You are sure of this. However, you were pulled over for a broken tail light or other technical infraction. So far, the officer has no reason to suspect DUI other than your age and geographic proximity to the bars around Wrigley Field. He now asks you to submit to a chemical test.

First of all, if there is no reasonable suspicion of DUI, the officer can’t ask you to submit to a test. Then again, after you rolled down your window to hand over your license and registration, he potentially smelled the booze on your breath and noticed your watery, bloodshot eyes. At this point, if you submit to a chemical test, you are guaranteed to fail. Should you refuse?

For first-time refusers, the penalty for refusal is a one-year license suspension. After 30 days into the suspension, a restricted license that requires an ignition interlock device to be installed in your vehicle is an option.

But if this is your second or subsequent refusal, the suspension is for three years, with no restricted options available.

If you are okay with the suspension, and you’re sure you’ll fail the chemical test, then yes, it may just be a good idea to refuse. However, you’ll also want to refuse field sobriety tests, and immediately request an attorney. This should mean no more interrogation or other means of getting you to potentially incriminate yourself.

Without a chemical test, the only method of proving that you were DUI is through field sobriety tests or the observations of the officer, such as weaving while driving or puking up Jack Daniels on his boots. If you gave the officer no evidence other than the smell of your breath, proving the case in court will be very difficult. The refusal itself can be introduced as evidence that you were aware that you were guilty of DUI. However, that alone probably would not convince a jury.

Now, can you be forced to submit to a blood, breath, or urine test? If so, refusal would basically net you a longer suspension and still result in a conviction. Check back later this week to find out.

Related Resources:

• Consult a Chicago DUI Defense Attorney (FindLaw)
• The Suspension (FindLaw’s Chicago DUI Blog)
• Implied Consent: Should You Choose Blood or Breath? (FindLaw’s Chicago DUI Blog)
• Understanding Blood Alcohol Tests (FindLaw’s Chicago DUI Blog)