"Field Sobriety Tests" can be expected to be
requested of a person in almost EVERY DUI/APC arrest. The
officer will expect you to "do as you’re told" when he asks you
to get out of your car and "do a couple of tests to see if you
are safe to continue to drive". And, certainly, you MUST get out
of the car, if and when he requests it of you: THAT is not
discretionary! You might believe that if you pass these tests,
you will be allowed to go on about your business and WON’T be
arrested. Think again. If a police officer has reached the point
in his investigation of you as a potential drunk driver, he has
- IN ALMOST EVERY INSTANCE - already decided to
arrest you. He is ONLY attempting to get you to GIVE him more
evidence against you which is NOT generally protected by
the Miranda warning(s).
And, you are NOT going to
pass those tests. As indicated, they are DESIGNED to be failed,
EVEN if you are sober . . . period!
SFST’s were designed to be done in a specific
manner or way. Any alleged reliability or validation that might
be claimed by the government is ONLY when these are done as
originally designed. However, Mr. Sifers’ office has, in the
thousands of cases that they have represented, seen only a VERY
FEW of these tests that were administered to his clients in this
PROPER and PRESCRIBED manner! The government's own research
tells them that the tests are "compromised" if they are NOT done
by the procedures that are set out. However, it is the RARE cop
who seems to know this proper procedure. But, they do them
ANYWAY, arrest people, and claim that the SFST’s were the reason
that it was decided that the person should have been arrested!!
Designed to be failed? Absolutely. Consider
what it takes to pass or fail one.
On the "walk and turn" test (see below), a
person must complete the test with a 97% level of
accuracy (EVEN WHEN IT IS GIVEN IN THE ABOVE REFERENCED
PROPER MANNER) to pass this test. 97%!
On the one leg stand (see below), a person must complete the
test with a 98% level of accuracy (EVEN WHEN IT IS
GIVEN IN THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROPER MANNER) to pass this
test! 98%! If ANYONE was required to pass a
driving test at this level, there would only a few licensed
drivers on the road in the U.S. today. Indeed, it is UNLIKELY
that the officer scored that high on the required proficiency
tests when he went through the training course for these field
For more on this and to see how these figures
were developed, click on C. Jeffrey Sifers’ photo below and read
the article that he presented to the Oklahoma Criminal Defense
Lawyers Association a couple of years ago.
REMEMBER: these tests are voluntary. There is
NO requirement for you to do them. The officer will not tell you
that. If you refuse to submit to them, there is NO LEGAL
ramification. It will not revoke your license. What it WILL DO
is avoid your voluntary giving of evidence against yourself,
whether it is valid evidence or not.
SO, should you submit to these field tests, if
asked by an officer?
Mr. Sifers advises his clients to NOT TAKE field tests.
Get out of the car (which you must do) and politely refuse to
submit to these field tests. When the officer - which he will -
tells you that he will have to arrest you if you don’t take them
and that if you pass them he won’t arrest you, remember: he has
already planned to arrest you. You are NOT going to pass the
tests. Why give him MORE bogus evidence that you will have to