It was just a lame excuse to see if you were drunk, because it was late at night, he probably wanted just to pull you over and test you (which is illegal), but he didn't have a reason to pull you over, to he made up an excuse.

 

Some interesting points of view and opinions here.

I've been riding motorcycles for about 30 years. Like anything else, there are many shades of gray area when it comes to car and motorcycle exhaust noise, consideration during use, and enforcement by LEOs - more than would be prudent to discuss here.

However, as far as police doing a noise test on the side of the road, those results mean nothing in court because exhaust noise tests have to be done in controlled conditions that eliminate all variables. Noise certification tests are done in acoustically controlled rooms so that all results are comparable and official.

Zip

 

This is the same as saying warrantless searches of your person or property shouldn't be a problem if you have nothing to hide! Don't mind us while we examine your bank records and use your phone logs to figure out who you associate with. Oh yeah, we'll also record your private conversations, and flag the use of vocabulary that we find worthy of concern. By the way, we'll also look in all the boxes in your attic!

While it's true that drinking and driving is a problem, ERRATIC DRIVING should be the cause for an investigation, not something else. While I'm all for the public good, I'm also a strict consitutionalist, and the bill of rights shouldn't be subrogated by an "ends justifies the means" argument.

Matt

 

x1,000,000

 

And you've learned this how? Lawyerin' for Dummies book?

Some people wouldn't know probable cause if it bit them in the a**.

 

I got stopped late one night in my Dino, I was going the limit in a 30 mph zone so I knew it wasn't speeding. The cop told me I had a tail light out and after checking Lic, reg, and ins, I got out to look. Amazingly they were all blazing away! I looked at him quizically and he swore one of them was out when he stopped me and then asked, what kind of car is this anyway? Yeah? What's it run? and so on - the real reason he pulled me over, he just wanted to ask about my car!

 

Brother is cop, I'm well informed of my rights of what to do when, especially drinking and driving is involved. Being pulled over for an admitted "vehicle modification, eg loud exhaust or stereo" is not PC for field sobriety test. The officer could just as easily say I saw you swerve ( when you did not ). That being the case, you would be forced to take some level of sobriety test, and the field sobriety test is not it. Blood or certified breathalizer at the station is the only way to go (especially if yo've been drinking). As, the officer is not able to determine your level intoxication based on reciting the alphabet backwards, standing on your heels. I know some of you guys don't care and would just comply (especially when you haven't had a beer with dinner) but this how we've come to this point with rampant police abuse.

Nam is clearly not the place for this kinda discussion, so this will be my last post on the subject. But in practice I have refused sobriety tests in very similar circumstances, and still have my license. Happy motoring sheeple.

 

Let me see if I get this straight ...

-Pulled over for a loud exhaust... a civil traffic infraction.

-It's 4AM, the OP is coming from a club.

-Based on the admission of clubbing and the time of night, the Officer inquires about alcohol consumption (a criminal violation) which the OP obviously denies ('cause he hadn't been drinking).

-Officers asks the OP if he would be willing complete some VOULENTARY field sobriety tests and the OP agrees (you don't have to, they're VOULENTARY).

-OP passes the FST's (of course). and is subsequently released with a warning for the civil infraction after some polite small talk.

Sounds like the cop was doing his job and operating well within his authority.

There appear to be a lot of people here who are grossly misinformed as to what's legally required for the police to contact, stop/detain, seize/arrest, or search persons & property. If you are having frequent run-in's with the po-po for one reason or another, it might be a good idea to brush up on your state's traffic laws, criminal laws, state constitution and United States Constitution (and of course all applicable state and federal case law pertaining to whatever specific topic you're researching). There's a TON of information that your buddies probably didn't know about, didn't choose to tell you about, or they just plain told you wrong while hanging out around the water cooler.

Now for those who just plain don't agree with that specific infraction (of which I am one), you do have the right and ability to organize and pressure your legislators to change or repeal the law itself (even in California)... but then again, it is easier to just to gripe on an internet forum, isn't it?

 

yup i live in FL also and thats the law. The after market exhaust cant be any louder than the stock exhaust. Here on the island cops wont give you crap about loud exhausts. Generally here in FL i don't think cops care at all about exhausts. I have hear of so many people in CA that have been getting in trouble for modifying their cars.

Just lay off that gas pedal when your radar pings

 

I agree with MSH441 100%. Here in Florida a failure to take FST's (Field Sobriety Test) will land you in jail for the night and a one year License suspension. After all about 60% of vehicles on the road in Dade County after 1:00pm are DWI.

 

WOW!!! I did not know that. See... learn somthing new every day.

Here (Washington), as well as Oregon and Cali... roadside FST's (including the portable breath test) are completely VOULENTARY. You can refuse.

Now, if there's any other evidence of intoxication (driving, odor, visual cues), most officers will err on the side of caution rather than let a potential drunk drive away from a stop. That could mean arrest. If he/she is fealing generous (or no additional observations are present) they'll request that you call a cab or a friend. It all depends.

Now if you DO get arrested and refuse to provide the "official" breath test (usually at the precinct house or jail... you will likley get booked for the night and loose your license for a year.

Again, it's good to know you local laws.

 

Actually, that's not true. In Florida, you can be penalized for refusing to take a blood, breath, or urine test to determine sobriety, but the Field Sobriety Test is strictly voluntary (although police officers are happy to have you believe otherwise).

Now, that's not necessarily a big help, because many patrol officers carry portable breathalyzers, so refusing the FST might just mean that you go right to the breathalyzer. But, it's easier to do poorly on a FST even when you're sober than it is to fail a breathalyzer when you're sober.

The Florida law did change in 2002 to allow the prosecutor to tack on an additional *misdemeanor* charge for refusing the FST, if you have a prior history of refusing FSTs.

 

How is that possible? If the FST's are voulentary in FLA... how can there be a crime to refuse a voulentary test the 1st, 4th or even 20th time?

Now, I can see if someone is refusing the "official" breath test back at the office time-and-time-again ('cause what are they going to do? Suspend your license AGAIN!?! Put you on double-secret probation!?!).

Since there's little to be gained by submitting to a breath test if you're already suspended for a refusal, I could see where another criminal charge might be put on the books for repeat refusals... but FST's? Really?

 

I don't know why they wrote the law that way, and it's only been that way since 2002. Basically, you get one free refusal of the FST. If during another encounter you refuse the FST again, *and* you're arrested, the prosecutor can tack on a misdemeanor charge for refusing the FST after having refused it once already in the past.

Personally, I will refuse an FST every day and twice on Sunday, even if I haven't had a drop to drink. First, they're not always administered correctly, second, they're not always videotaped, so the only lasting evidence from the FST might be the officer's subjective written report, and third, I have existing injuries to one of my legs that might make an FST problematic for me under the best of circumstances. I'm not going to give the officer a chance to put "failed FST" in his report, forcing me to explain my medical history to a judge and hope for the best.

 

Nearly 20,000 people died on the road last year in alcohol related motor vehicle accidents...

The roads are dangerous enough without drunks out there. While I HATE it when police officers fish for reason to pull you over, something needs to happen.

If there is a cause to rally for this is it. Why do so many people die because they are irresponsible?

I have a way to stop it. Although it wouldn't be socially acceptable

 

I was wrong what I meant was that if you refuse VOLUNTARY FST and show some type of impairment you will automatically be taken to the station for a BAT (Breath Alcohol Test) anyways. Then a refusal of BAT will result in a 12-18 month automatic suspension depending if this is your first or not. In the State Of Florida we have printed on the bottom of the drivers license "OPERATION OF A MOTOR VEHICLE CONSTITUTES CONSENT TO ANY SOBRIETY TEST REQUIRED BY LAW"(316.1932(1)(a). In the State Of Florida driving is a PRIVILEDGE!!! Sorry for the misinformation!
Where is the one free refusal for FST printed? Please let me Know! If you are pulled over and smell of alcohol you are going to the station whether or not you take FST. NO FREEBIES HERE!
P.S. Most veteran officers will not conduct FST without the driver EMITTING THE SMELL OF ALCOHOL or the appearance of some type of impairment upon contact!!! After all ALCOHOL is not the only thing that can impair a driver.