What is DWI "Per Se"?

One of the more challenging things about practicing DWI law is communicating the legal statutes in a way that is clear and understandable to my clients. All 50 states have at least two main types of DWI/DUI offenses. One is called a common law DWI, this is what most people understand or interpret as the "driving while drunk" or "driving while impaired" or "driving under the influence." It has many legal definitions, but in NYS it is mental and physical incapacity to operate (drive) a vehicle as a reasonably prudent (safe, responsible) person.

The other NYS statute is our DWI "per se." PER SE: latin for "by, through, in and of itself, intrinsically, inherently, requiring no external evidence."

If you get one thing from this blog this is it:

You DO NOT have to show the signs or symptoms of intoxication or drunkenness or impairment to be found guilty of this offense.

Merely the fact that a "good" (accurate, reliable, properly administered, calibrated) breath test indicated a BAC (blood alcohol concentration) of .08 or more. Some people like to argue but "I wasn't drunk." It does not matter. But I drove perfectly, it does not matter. But I understood the police officer and did all the tests right, it does not matter. If the state (the government/the prosecutor) can bring in their BTO (breath test operator) and make out (prove):

1. he or she was licensed

2. the machine was properly working

3. the test was properly administered

4. the test was performed within two hours of arrest

then ... the jury may (or may not) find that you are guilty of DWI "per se."

Now a DWI defense attorney can argue the problems with taking indirect measurements of blood through the taking of breath. He can argue that everyone is different even though these machines are calculated and calibrated and set up to test and assess "average" people. He can argue that you, the individual on this given occasion had specific medical issues. He can argue that the test was not properly administered, ie. No 20 minute "observation" period.

I have previously discussed other defenses to breath test results that do not match "sober" behavior patterns. In addition, everything the state proves must be proven to the BRD standard (beyond a reasonable doubt).

I could go on and on, suffice to say, the "science" behind breath testing for alcohol leaves a lot to be desired. Prosecutors and many Judges love to rely upon breath test numbers as godspell. After going through the certification program, and studying these machines I am more than a skeptic concerning their accuracy and reliability. I do not trust breath tests!