Denver DUI lawyer / reasons to arrest you

As I stated in my blog post about handheld breath tests, one of the best ways a Denver DUI lawyer can get a case dismissed or charges reduced is by proving that the police officer did not have a reason to arrest you. In that post, I said the officer needs "probable cause," or basically needs to observe something that shows a pretty fair chance that a crime was committed. So if you were pulled over for a broken tail light then arrested for a DUI, does that mean your Denver DUI lawyer has no chance of winning with this argument? Not exactly. And this is where it gets complicated.

Basically, you can't be arrested for a broken tail light. The officer can pull you over and ask you a few questions, then write you a ticket, but since it is a regulatory offense (really it is more civil than criminal) he can't arrest you without something more. This goes back to an interesting divergence in the law: the Supreme Court created something called a "stop" which requires less evidence of a crime having been committed than an arrest. So if the cop sees you with a tail light out, or swerving slightly in your lane, or pretty much anything else he thinks is "suspicious," you can be stopped. All the stop does though is give the officer a quick opportunity to look for probable cause. What this essentially means is looking at your license and registration, checking to see if you "look drunk," and looking inside the car to see if there are beer bottles or something. He can also ask you to get out of the car. Beyond that, you have no obligation to answer questions, or perform roadside sobriety tests. So don't do either. If you feel the officer is fishing for a reason to arrest you, you can either ask if you are free to go (with a possible violation ticket) or ask for a Denver DUI lawyer. That makes your situation crystal clear:
to keep you longer, the officer needs to arrest you. For the arrest, probable cause is required. Although he'll probably arrest you now, it gives your Denver DUI lawyer a chance to argue that the arrest violated your constitutional rights. There's a good chance you'll win too, since the officer has very little in the way of evidence except for possible "bloodshot eyes" and "slurred speech" which is something they'll always say you have.