New York DUI Law Blog

There are undoubtedly many Reese Witherspoon fans in the New York City area. Commonly referred to as one of "America's Sweethearts," many flock to see her films and tune in for any news regarding her personal life. Recently however she was in the news for her antics with police officers when her husband was pulled over and arrested for drunk driving in another state.

The incident occurred late month after the couple had gone out to dinner. As her husband drove, a police officer pulled the vehicle for suspicion of DUI. According to the actress, she and her husband had both consumed wine at dinner.

Getting convicted for driving under the influence of alcohol carries serious consequences. In New York, convicted drunk drivers can face civil and criminal penalties including fines, jail time, driver's license suspension and the requirement to use an ignition interlock device.

These aren't the only consequences drunk drivers face, though. In addition to penalties imposed by the courts, a drunk driving conviction - or even an arrest - can have significant impacts on a person's personal and professional life. This principle is highlighted by a recent drunk driving arrest involving former New York basketball star Kenny Anderson.

A Supreme Court of the United States decision earlier this week could go a long way toward shaping how police in Manhattan are able to test individuals for drunk driving. If someone were to be pulled over by the New York Police Department on suspicion of drunk driving, he or she has very specific rights, including the right of unreasonable search and seizure. What this is usually interpreted to mean is that without some kind of special circumstance, the police need a warrant to execute a search warrant or seize evidence. Since a former Supreme Court ruling in 1996, however, this has been read to mean that the potential loss of evidence can be read as just one of those special circumstances.

So, for the past 16 years, police have been conducting warrantless blood draws on individuals suspected of drunk driving. They reasoned that because the alcohol in an individual's system can disappear over time, time was of the essence in collecting evidence of driving while intoxicated. Earlier this week, however, Justice Sonia Sotomayor and the majority of the court held that this reason alone was not sufficient for a warrantless blood draw. Moving forward, police will either need to get a warrant or will need some other reason to take a suspect's blood.

An off-duty Staten Island firefighter is in serious trouble after he refused to take a breath test after a recent accident at the corner of Arthur Kill Road and Winant Place. The firefighter said that the accident happened when he was going around a curve and may have blacked out, but police are saying that he was driving while intoxicated. The Staten Island Advance also reports that the firefighter refused a Breathalyzer test, which may have put him in even more trouble.

One of the problems that can come with a test refusal is a hesitancy on the part of the Staten Island district attorney to offer a plea deal. In many cases, especially if there is a general lack of evidence, the prosecutor may offer a deal. Generally, the charges will be lessened or will be dropped following the completion of some kind of probation. In an effort to reduce the number of people who refuse breath tests, however, prosecutors are also unwilling to offer plea deals to people who refuse to test.