Randy Goodis, P.A. Attorney at Law

Effective Cross-Examination is Key to Successful DWI Defense - continued

Pattern 5

Best is initially used at pre-trial motion practice, where depositions and/or administrative hearings are not available here, you illustrate the lack of specificity in describing driving patterns. By suggesting that any of us could be accused of weaving by merely changing lanes, we permit the jury (trier of fact) to understand the defense perspective.

Q.	You indicated the defendant was weaving from one lane to another, didn't you?
A.	Yes, I did.
Q.	Is that another way of saying that he drove his car from one lane to another?
A.	I guess so.
Q.	So, if I drive into the lane on my left, then move back to the right and then over to another lane, you
	might say I was weaving, won't I?
A.	Well, if you just go from one lane to another...
Q.	A lot of sober drivers may cross over several lanes, several times, and be completely sober, right?
A.	Yes.
Q.	When I get on the interstate or any highway, I have to move to other lanes or I will just remain in the
	right hand lane, won't I?
A.	Of course.
Q.	So, what you call weaving could just be a sober person moving from lane to lane?

Pattern 6

In this line of questioning, we reverse the state's attack and simultaneously demonstrate the lack of fairness of the test and the officer administering it.

Q.	Now, you testified that you stopped the defendant at 3:00 a.m., didn't you?
A.	Yes.
Q.	And you testified that you had a clear and unobstructed view of the defendant's driving pattern. Are
	you quite sure of that?
A.	That's true; that's because there weren't any other cars there at the time.
Q.	And as I understand your testimony, there was no one else whose driving was affected by the
	defendant's car, correct?
A.	Correct.
Q.	But do you know that the law of this State condemns improper lane usage only if the changing of lanes
	puts anyone in danger?