A lawyer on your side. The prosecution is gearing up to convict the OWI defendant. They have powerful allies on their side including the federal government's transportation agency, which helped write this excerpt as part of a DUI prosecutor's manual. Prosecutors and police get periodic training on how to conduct OWI (DUI) trials and the law enforcement officers in each drunk driving case spend half their time testifying professionally in court. Do you have a lawyer on your side? Contact DAC-LAW PLC at 319-389-4276.
The crime of Operating While Under the Influence, or, OWI, sometimes called DUI in other States, can be committed in three ways in the State of Iowa. First, a Defendant can be convicted of operating while under the influence of alcohol, drugs, or a combination of both by operating a motor vehicle while have a BraC of .08 grams of ethanol per 210 L breath, or, in the alternative, by having a BAC of .08 grams of ethanol per 100 mL of blood.
It’s important to recognize that the preliminary breath test, or, PBT, is one of a battery of field tests designed to determine if reasonable grounds exist to invoke implied consent and that the PBT result, either as to mere presence of alcohol or the actual amount, is not admissible before the jury.
In the alternative, the Datamaster DMT is a larger, stationary device, certified and maintained by the Department of Public Safety and DCI criminalists in law enforcement departments and jails. A breath sample drawn and tested on this machine greater than the upper .08 BrAC limit is per se in violation of Iowa Code § 321J.2. Juries may be instructed that the test result from this machine, if administered in a manner established by the State of Iowa, is the presumptive level of alcohol at the time a motorist was driving if also within two hours of a Defendant’s seizure by law enforcement at the scene.
Second, any measure of a controlled substance may serve to establish “under the influence” and is not measured by either the PBT nor the Datamaster DMT, which test only for alcohol, although law enforcement officers attempt to argue that the PBT rules out alcohol for impairment that they say already exists. A blood test can establish content of controlled substances other than alcohol.
Third, the prosecutor can just "gin" up a case by saying the Defendant was under the influence by a combination of outward appearance and law enforcement observations-- which makes an OWI (DUI) arrest particularly subjective and thus dangerous.
If you or a loved one has been arrested for OWI (DUI) in Iowa, contact DAC-LAW PLC for a free initial consultation today.
Making the OWI Defendant the Bad Guy: The NHTSA prosecutor's manual advises prosecutors and law enforcement to use charged terms to villify an OWI defendant, to ascribe malicious intent to a near absolute liability offense, and to obtain convictions for drunk driving cases, apparently at all costs. Query: isn't it supposed to be true that justice is served even if the Defendant is acquitted because the jury is the fact finder, not the prosecutor? Moreover, so-called "alcohol-related" accidents recorded by NHTSA have been debunked as without proximate cause because the statistics are inflated with the FARS data management system that does not record actual proximate cause of "alcohol involved" or "alcohol related" accidents. Is the federal transportation agency intermeddling in State prosecutions and trying to pick winners and losers with your tax dollars?