Any person that goes to court on a criminal charge without a lawyer is making a mistake. The prosecutor is never going to make a decent plea offer to a pro se defendant and it would be very rare for one to get into any pretrial diversion program.

I have seen people end up with jail time on a charge that 99% of the time with a lawyer would have been probation.

You will never get the charges reduced to the proper charge rather than the overcharge that a lot of prosecutors go for originally if you don't have a lawyer.

To out it bluntly, they know they will win no matter how bad the case is with a pro se defendant, so they have no reason to be reasonable.

since were on the subject I thought I'd throw some info out there that was told to me. #1, a breathalizer is not neccesary for a dui arrest, due to the fact that every law officer in the state can arrest for dui, but not every officer is certified to give breathalizer. #2, The dui law is kinda vague, and reads like this, A person may be charged with Driving Under the Influence (DUI) if the police officer(s) reasonably believe(s) that there is probable cause that the person was found to be in actual physical control of a motor vehicle while:

there is .08% or greater of alcohol in his blood,
under the influence of alcohol,
under the influence of a controlled substance,
under the combined influence of alcohol and a controlled substance, or
under the influence of any substance which impairs mental or physical faculties.

#3, in my opinion,if you are intoxicated,DO NOT perform the field sobriety test. Thats just one more piece of evidence to use against you

#4 if arrested, keep your mouth shut,and if you refuse the breathaizer at the station, which is the one that is used in court, you automatically lose your licenses for 180 days. as oppsed to the usual 90 days with first offense.

#5 If you are going to court ALWAYS carry a lawyer.
leo's and attorneys please correct any of the info if it is incorrect.

Your pretty close. You can get arrested and convicted of DUI even if you refuse everything. If you were stopped for a less safe act and when you step out of the car you stumble all over the place, etc etc. I have won several that I was not able to conduct full SFST. Most of them on I20. I just didn't feel it was safe for the offender and did not want to put anyone in a bad spot. I just explain why in my report and I've always been good to go on those. Seems like all the ones on I20 are super hammered. Not trying to hijack, but here's a decent story


I got out with a guy on I20 at the Georgia line. He was parked in the right hand lane with no lights on what so ever. It was approx 10 pm. Upon speaking with him and asking where he was coming from he said he was coming from the Cahaba River. I then ask him where he was headed and he said Birmingham. I politely explained that he only missed it by about 70 miles . This guy had no business even thinking about driving and it's a miracle he didn't hurt anyone that night. It was far from his first rodeo.

If you are a good officer with a proven track record of telling the truth, your testimony is gold in these cases and carries weight enough to usually get a conviction even with a refusal.

So we never got a clear answer...if Bob get's pulled over on his way home from work should he refuse the test?

He blows all day at work so what's one more time on the way home

So we never got a clear answer...if Bob get's pulled over on his way home from work should he refuse the test?

Bob getting Angry....