Texas v. A.H.

0.119 BLOOD TEST!!!!! Client was asleep in the middle of an intersection in midtown. When HPD knocked on his window, he put his car in drive and drove for approximately 25 block through midtown and into downtown Houston. He pulled over voluntarily and police pulled weapons and performed a felony traffic stop. Client stated that he pulled over when he saw an officer’s lights on behind him. It was agreed that he did not speed, run any red lights, fail to signal lane changes while “evading police.” Client was never charged with evading, because he wasn’t evading. The facts supported our defense that he was just asleep and did not see the police, as opposed to wasted drunk and passed out. After client was handcuffed, a Sergeant with HPD performed the HGN test on the client. The Sergeant testified under oath that he looked for distinct and sustained nystagmus first and messed up on the prescribed timing of the HGN. This same Sergeant also testified that marijuana caused HGN, it does not. And muscular sclerosis caused HGN, it does not. I tried to give the Sergeant a chance to admit he makes mistakes, but he wouldn’t, and was adamant he is always right. So I asked him: “Are you just as sure he was intoxicated, as you are about the timing / marijuana / MS?” He answered yes without hesitation. I then used the HPD DWI task force officer to bring the truth to light. The Jury hated the Sergeant. The DWI task force officer was knowledgeable and did his job. Client really never stood a chance once he was pulled over, handcuffed and then given a bad test by the Sergeant. The DWI task force officer just took him to the station and put the tests on video. The client looked good on video and the Jury agreed no loss of mental or physical faculties due to intoxication. Then they withdrew his blood and the result was received in evidence of a 0.119. HPD blood lab has lots of problems and the jury got to see them: pipettes failing calibration; improper method being used; State analysts unwilling to admit they made a mistake; analysts never watching the video; nonsensical Widmark estimation, and not being able to testify to intoxication at the time of driving. Ultimately, the Jury made the just and right decision and found the client Not Guilty. The State absolutely cannot prove a blood test case beyond a reasonable doubt with the state of testing in Texas. This is why we need an independent lab, free from police and DA bias and coercion. This was the client’s first DWI and he fought it for a year. Thank you to the Jury for standing up for the citizen. Thank you, thank you, thank you for your courage.