Motions for DWI Cases

AuthorRobert K. Gill/Mark G. Daniel
Pages321-360
10-1
CHAPTER 10
MOTIONS FOR DWI
CASES
I. Motions to Suppress Evidence
A. Illegal Stop of Vehicle
§10:01 Statutory Law
§10:02 Stop Is a Seizure That Requires Reasonable Suspicion
§10:03 Additional Arrests and Further Detention
§10:04 Motion in Limine Illegal Detention or Seizure of Defendant
B. Oral Statements on DWI Videotape
§10:10 No Statement After Defendant Invokes Rights
C. Intoxilyzer Test Results
§10:20 Statutory Law
§10:21 State’s Burden for Admissibility
§10:22 No Need to Establish Scientific Basis
D. Refusal to Submit to Breath Test
§10:25 Statutory Law
§10:26 Evidence of Refusal
E. Retrograde Extrapolation Evidence
§10:30 Statutory Law
§10:31 Definition and Purpose
§10:32 State’s Burden for Admissibility
F. Blood Specimen
§10:40 Statutory Law
§10:41 Taking Specimen Is a Search, But Not Self-Incrimination
§10:42 Requirements for Admissibility
Texas Criminal Forms 10-2
II. Motions to Quash
A. Quashing the Information or Indictment
§10:50 Statutory Law
§10:51 No Need to Allege the Intoxicant
B. Quashing the Enhancement Paragraph
§10:60 Statutory Law
§10:61 Priors Must Be Within Ten Years of Offense or Each Other
III. Stipulations to Jurisdictional Prior Convictions
§10:70 Statutory Law
§10:71 Offering to Stipulate
§10:72 Stipulation Removes Need for Evidence
§10:73 Fact-Finder Should Be Informed of Stipulation
IV. Motions in Limine
§10:80 General Points
V. Petitions for Occupational Operator’s License
§10:90 Statutory Law
§10:91 Pre-Trial Application Is a Civil Matter
VI. Forms
Form 10-1.1 Motion to Suppress Evidence Based on Illegal Stop of Defendant’s Vehicle
Form 10-1.2 Motion in Limine (Illegal Detention or Seizure of Defendant)
Form 10-2 Brief in Support of Pre-Trial Motion to Suppress Evidence Based on Illegal Vehicle
Detention
Form 10-3 Motion to Suppress Oral Statements Made on DWI Videotape
Form 10-4.1 Motion to Suppress Evidence of Intoxilyzer Test Results
Form 10-4.2 Motion to Suppress Evidence of Intoxilyzer Test Refusal (Involuntary Consent)
Form 10-4.3 Motion to Suppress Evidence of Breath or Blood Test (Lack of Probable Cause)
Form 10-4.4 Motion to Suppress Evidence of Breath or Blood Test (Lack of Arrest)
Form 10-5 Motion to Suppress Retrograde Extrapolation Evidence
Form 10-6 Motion to Suppress Evidence of Blood Specimen
Form 10-7 Motion to Quash Information or Indictment
Form 10-8 Brief in Support of Motion to Quash DWI Information
Form 10-9 Motion to Quash Enhancement Paragraph
Form 10-10 Brief in Support of Motion to Quash Felony DWI Enhancement
Form 10-11 Request to Stipulate to Jurisdictional Prior Convictions
Form 10-12 Agreed Stipulation of Evidence
Form 10-13 Defendant’s Motion in Limine
Form 10-14 Petition for Occupational Operator’s License
Form 10-15 Affidavit of Petitioner for Petition for Occupational Operator’s License
Form 10-16 Waiver of Service for Petition for Occupational Operator’s License
Form 10-17 State’s Request for Waiver of Presence at Hearing for Petition for Occupational
Operator’s License
Form 10-18 Order to Remove Interlock Device
Form 10-19 State’s Motion for Conditions on Occupational License
Form 10-20 Defendant’s Motion to Modify Conditions of Occupational Driver’s License
10-3 moTions For dWi Cases §10:02
I. MOTIONS TO SUPPRESS
EVIDENCE
A. illeGAl stop of vehiCle
§10:01 Statutory Law
United States Constitution Amend. IV.
The right of the people to be secure in their
persons, houses, papers, and effects, against
unreasonable searches or seizures, shall not be
violated, and no warrants shall issue but upon
probable cause, supported by oath or affirma-
tion, and particularly describing the place to be
searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Texas Constitution Art. 1, §9.
The people shall be secure in their persons,
houses, papers, and possessions, from all
unreasonable seizures or searches, and no
warrant to search any place or to seize any
person or thing, shall issue without describ-
ing them as near as may be, nor without prob-
able cause, supported by oath or affirmation.
Tex. Code Crim. Pro. Art. 1.06. Searches and Seizures
The people shall be secure in their persons,
houses, papers and possessions from all
unreasonable seizures or searches. No war-
rant to search any place or to seize any per-
son or thing shall issue without describing
them as near as may be, nor without probable
cause supported by oath or affirmation.
Tex. Code Crim. Pro. Art. 38.23. Evidence Not to
Be Used
(a) No evidence obtained by an officer or
other person in violation of any provi-
sion of the Constitution or laws of the
State of Texas, or of the Constitution or
laws of the United States of America,
shall be admitted in evidence against
the accused on the trial of any crimi-
nal case. In any case where the legal
evidence raises an issue hereunder,
the jury shall be instructed that if it
believes, or has a reasonable doubt, that
the evidence was obtained in violation
of the provisions of this article, then
and in such event, the jury shall disre-
gard any such evidence so obtained.
(b) It is an exception to the provisions
of Subsection (a) of this article that
the evidence was obtained by a law
enforcement officer acting in objec-
tive good faith reliance upon a war-
rant issued by a neutral magistrate
based upon probable cause.
PRACTICE TIP:
While all of the above statutory provisions are
important to cite in a suppression motion and sup-
pression hearing, the most important is Tex. Code
Crim. Pro. Art. 38.23. This statute is the most inclu-
sive provision. It includes constitutional and statu-
tory provisions of both the state and federal gov-
ernments; it also covers searches and seizures by
private citizens as well as agents of law enforce-
ment. It should always be cited in the suppression
motion context. State v. Toone, 872 S.W.2d 750
(Tex.Cr.App. 1994); see also Texas Criminal Jury
Charges Chapter 12, Special Charges.
§10:02 Stop Is a Seizure That
Requires Reasonable
Suspicion
The stopping of a vehicle by law enforcement is
a “seizure” under the Fourth Amendment. Colorado v.
Bannister, 449 U.S. 1, 101 S.Ct. 42, 65 L.Ed.2d 1 (1 980);
State v. Sanchez, 856 S.W.2d 166 (Tex.Cr.App. 1993).
Officers may stop vehicles for investigative purposes
where they have specific articulable facts which, consider-
ing the officer’s experience and his inferences from those
facts, would reasonably warrant an intrusion on the free-
dom of the citizen stopped for such an investigation.
Reyes v. State, 910 S.W.2d 585 (Tex.App.—Amarillo
1995, pet. ref’d); Cardenas v. State, 857 S.W.2d 707
(Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1993, pet. ref’d).
The stop of the defendant can be suppressed
where the officer has insufficient reasonable suspi-
cion to justify the detention. Johnson v. State, 912
S.W.2d 227 (Tex.Cr.App. 1995).
The defendant has the burden of production to
raise the issue that a search or seizure was illegal.
Russell v. State, 717 S.W.2d 7 (Tex.Cr.App. 1986).
For more on Motions to Suppress Evidence
based on illegal detention of individuals, see Chapter
3, Suppressing Evidence Seized From Persons.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT