Drawing on Past Experience, Clinic Intern Gains New Experience
By Professor John Francis
Before enrolling at Washburn Law School, Patrick Turner was a law enforcement officer in Sedgwick County, Kansas. In his pre-law school career, Pat had many occasions to investigate people suspected of driving under the influence of alcohol. In fact, he was specially trained to observe cues that are indicia of intoxication. Pat was trained how to properly administer standardized field sobriety tests and was certified to operate the Intoxilyzer 5000, the machine used by law enforcement agencies in Kansas to measure people's blood alcohol content.
Last semester, as a Legal Intern with the Washburn Law Clinic, Mr. Turner had the opportunity to approach a DUI case from the other side by representing a client charged with driving under the influence of alcohol. Pat's experience informed his case investigation, leading him to seek out the operation logs for the Intoxilyzer machine used to test his client. Pat also reviewed the video recording of the standardized field sobriety tests (SFST) conducted on his client, viewing the recording through the lens of someone trained to administer the tests. After evaluating this case discovery, Pat spotted some irregularities in how the SFST were conducted and noted a problem with the logs for the breath test machine.
Pat researched how these irregularities would affect the admissibility and weight of the evidence that would be offered against his client. He then proceeded to develop a trial strategy. Mr. Turner refined cross examination plans for the officers involved in the arrest of his client. These examinations were designed to highlight the irregularities in the testing that Pat had spotted. He then created a framework of legal arguments to highlight to the court the reasons that the test results didn't comply with requirements for admissibility. In advance of the trial, Pat filed a motion to exclude the results of the Intoxilyzer test from the trial evidence.
After a great deal of preparation and practice, the day of the client's bench trial arrived. During the testimony of the prosecution's first witness, the results of the Intoxilyzer test were offered into evidence. Pat was granted the opportunity to question the officer on the breath test machine operation and logs. After a lengthy and challenging examination of the testifying officer, who was not backing away from his position that the test was conducted properly, Pat established the facts he needed to support his argument. Presenting Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) regulations, statutory authority and supporting case law, Mr. Turner then made his case to the judge that the results of the Intoxilyzer test were not admissible. After hearing opposing arguments of the prosecution, the trial judge granted Pat's motion to exclude, ruling that the blood alcohol test results were not admissible. After the court's ruling, the prosecution offered a plea to Pat's client that involved dismissal of the DUI charge.
Combining his law enforcement experience with his growing advocacy skills developed in the Law School and Law Clinic, Pat Turner accomplished what many seasoned attorneys haven't. In doing so, Pat served the best traditions of our profession.
