DUI Conviction of Belligerant Driver Fails Due Lack of "Concrete" Evidence

by Joseph C. Maya on Mar. 24, 2017

Criminal Criminal  DUI-DWI 

Summary: Blog post on a DUI conviction that failed due to a lack of evidence.

For a free consultation with an experienced criminal defense attorney, please call the offices of Maya Murphy, P.C. today at (203) 221-3100 or Joseph C. Maya, Esq. at JMaya@Mayalaw.com.

 If police lack concrete evidence about when the arrestee drove his motor vehicle, they may not possess probable cause to arrest for driving under the influence.

At approximately 7:15 p.m. on July 2, 2015, a McDonald's worker observed plaintiff Larry Chiagouris, who seemed to be inebriated. Another worker asked Chiagouris whether he was driving, and he answered, "No." A customer called 911 when she observed Chiagouris, who appeared intoxicated, exit the McDonald's Restaurant at 7:37 p.m. and enter a BMW. Police arrived and observed Chiagouris in the BMW in the parking lot. The keys were not in the ignition. When asked to open the door and roll down the window, Chiagouris placed his finger to his ear and indicated that he had difficulty hearing. Police informed Chiagouris that they were going to break a car window, and he finally opened the door. Chiagouris did not remember when he arrived at McDonald's. He admitted that he had driven the BMW. After police arrested Chiagouris for driving under the influence, Chiagouris attempted to walk away. En route to and at the police station, Chiagouris interrupted the police officers, screamed, argued and claimed that he could not hear. As soon as his attorney arrived, he spoke to his attorney and did not appear to experience difficulty hearing. A hearing officer found that Chiagouris operated a motor vehicle, that police had probable cause to arrest for driving under the influence, and that Chiagouris was uncooperative and refused to take a blood-alcohol test.

The hearing officer suspended his driver's license for 45 days and required that he maintain an ignition interlock device for one year. Plaintiff appealed. The hearing officer reasonably concluded that Chiagouris refused to take the blood-alcohol test when he interrupted the police officers, screamed, argued and pretended that he could not hear. Plaintiff, wrote the court, "should not benefit from this sort of disruptive performance." Because none of the witnesses knew when Chiagouris arrived at Mc-Donald's, the possibility existed that he arrived hours earlier, turned off the ignition and sat and drank. Substantial evidence did not exist to support the hearing officer's conclusion that police possessed probable cause to arrest Chiagouris for driving under the influence. The court sustained the appeal and reversed the hearing officer's decision.

Maya Murphy P.C. has the resources and expertise to offer you the best possible representation throughout the criminal process. If you are facing criminal charges or wish to appeal your case, please call the offices of Maya Murphy, P.C. today at (203) 221-3100 or Joseph C. Maya, Esq. atJMaya@Mayalaw.com.

For continuous access to the legal world, follow us on Twitter and LinkedIn. We offer the latest updates on caselaw and legal news. In addition, informational videos are available for your convenience on our YouTube channel. 


Source: J. Schuman, Court Overturned Suspension of Driver's License for DUI, 42 Conn. Law Tribune 6, Feb. 8, 2016, at 6.

Legal Articles Additional Disclaimer

Lawyer.com is not a law firm and does not offer legal advice. Content posted on Lawyer.com is the sole responsibility of the person from whom such content originated and is not reviewed or commented on by Lawyer.com. The application of law to any set of facts is a highly specialized skill, practiced by lawyers and often dependent on jurisdiction. Content on the site of a legal nature may or may not be accurate for a particular state or jurisdiction and may largely depend on specific circumstances surrounding individual cases, which may or may not be consistent with your circumstances or may no longer be up-to-date to the extent that laws have changed since posting. Legal articles therefore are for review as general research and for use in helping to gauge a lawyer's expertise on a matter. If you are seeking specific legal advice, Lawyer.com recommends that you contact a lawyer to review your specific issues. See Lawyer.com's full Terms of Use for more information.