For years, police officers have testified at Oregon DMV hearings, DUI Motion to Suppress hearings, and in DUI trials that drivers accused of DUI had “failed” Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (SFSTs) out on the side of the road. The implication has been that a “failure” of SFSTs meant that the driver was drunk, intoxicated, or impaired. On July 6th, 2017, the Oregon Court of Appeals finally put a stop to that nonsense in the case of State v. Beltran-Chavez, 286 Or App 590 (2017).
Passing vs. Failing Oregon’s
Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (SFSTs)
Prior to State v. Beltran-Chavez, it was very common for officers to testify at trial that– during their DUI investigation– a driver showed several “clues” of intoxication by drugs or alcohol. If the driver had a certain number of clues, the officer would testify that they failed one or more of the tests. For information on the actual tests and their scoring, see our page Field Sobriety Tests Used in Oregon DUI Cases. This testimony by the officer would be based in part on a belief that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) had literally created a test that a driver could pass or fail by numeric score. The trouble is, NHTSA never did this. What they did do was assume the following:
- On the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN) test, a driver showing 4 of the 6 available clues would have a 77% chance of having a BAC equal to or greater than .10%.
- On the Walk and Turn (WAT) test, a driver showing 2 of the 8 available clues would have a 68% chance of having a BAC equal to or greater than .10%.
- On the One Leg Stand (OLS) test, a driver showing 2 of the 4 available clues would have a 65% chance of having a BAC equal to or greater than .10%.
Now, the truth is that even the numbers cited above are unscientific. For example, a driver who briefly raises one arm six inches away from their body and pauses for a few seconds while walking would be said to have “two clues on the Walk and Turn.” It would be inaccurate, unscientific, and unreasonable to make the assumption that there’s a 77% chance they are drunk based on those indicators alone. However, in law enforcement circles, they truly believe this. It’s a bit like a wizard saying, “If you mispronounce four of the six words wrong while casting the spell, there’s a 77% chance it won’t work.” Well, alchemy and wizardry have no place in the decision of whether or not to put someone in handcuffs and accuse them of a crime.
Oregon DUI Defense – Our Clients Don’t Fail
If you or someone you care about has been arrested for DUI, contact an Oregon DUI attorney to discuss options. We can help.