Title: DUI and DWI — What Are Your Rights When You’re Pulled Over
Author: LDS Legal Journal Team
Est Read: 10 minutes

The Stop Itself: When Can Police Pull You Over?

An officer needs reasonable suspicion that a traffic violation occurred or that you’re impaired. Anonymous tips can justify a stop only when reliability is shown—e.g., a contemporaneous 911 report of dangerous driving that police corroborate. See Navarette v. California (2014). Justia Law+2{{meta.siteName}}+2

A stop based on a reasonable mistake of law or fact can still be valid if the mistake is objectively reasonable (Heien v. North Carolina, 2014). {{meta.siteName}}+1

Checkpoint exception: Sobriety checkpoints, when properly designed, can be constitutional (Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz, 1990), though some states restrict or decline to use them. Legal Information Institute+1

What You Must Do vs. What You May Refuse

You must:

• Pull over safely and present license, registration, and proof of insurance when asked.
• Exit the vehicle if ordered. Officers may order drivers (Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 1977) and passengers (Maryland v. Wilson, 1997) out of the car for safety. Passengers are also considered “seized” and can challenge an unlawful stop (Brendlin v. California, 2007). Legal Information Institute+2Justia Law+2

You may refuse:

• Consent searches. You can say, “I don’t consent to any searches.” Without probable cause, a valid warrant, or another exception, a full search is not permitted. A search “incident to citation” is not allowed (Knowles v. Iowa, 1998). Justia Law+1
• Non-required field tests. In many states, SFSTs (e.g., walk-and-turn) are voluntary; refusal may influence arrest decisions but often has fewer automatic penalties than chemical-test refusal (this varies by state law).

You may remain silent beyond basic identification. Routine roadside questioning typically isn’t “custodial,” so Miranda warnings don’t apply unless the stop escalates to custodial interrogation (Berkemer v. McCarty, 1984). If questioning becomes accusatory and you are not free to leave, clearly invoke your right to silence and counsel. Legal Information Institute+1

How Long Can the Stop Last?

The stop must be limited to the time reasonably required to handle the traffic mission (license, warrants, ticket). Officers cannot prolong a completed traffic stop just to run a K-9 sniff without new reasonable suspicion. That’s the bright line in Rodriguez v. United States (2015). Justia Law+1

Defense lever: If the officer delayed the stop for non-traffic tasks (dog sniff, fishing expedition) without articulable facts of impairment or crime, your lawyer may suppress what followed under Rodriguez. UNC School of Government

Breath vs. Blood: Your Rights and the Warrant Rule

Once DUI is suspected, testing questions arise—this is where state implied-consent laws and the Fourth Amendment intersect.

• Breath tests: The Supreme Court allows warrantless breath tests incident to a lawful arrest for drunk driving (Birchfield v. North Dakota, 2016). Refusing a lawful breath test can carry criminal or administrative penalties, depending on state law. Justia Law+1
• Blood draws: Blood tests are more intrusive and generally require a warrant unless case-specific exigent circumstances exist (Missouri v. McNeely, 2013). Earlier, Schmerber v. California (1966) allowed a warrantless draw due to exigency after a crash; McNeely clarified there’s no per se exigency from alcohol dissipation—facts matter. Justia Law+2{{meta.siteName}}+2

Practical translation:

• If arrested, you can usually be required to blow.
• Blood draws typically need a warrant unless the government proves true urgency.
• Refusing a lawful test often triggers a separate driver’s license suspension and, in some states, a new criminal charge. Always check local law before deciding (or call counsel immediately).

What About the Field Sobriety Tests (SFSTs)?

SFSTs (HGN, walk-and-turn, one-leg stand) must be administered under standardized NHTSA protocols to carry weight. Poor instructions, uneven surfaces, weather, age, footwear, and medical conditions all matter. If performed, your lawyer will compare the officer’s steps to the manual and body-cam to challenge reliability. (Agency manuals are public and discoverable.)

Passenger Rights, Too

Remember: a passenger is also “seized” during a traffic stop and may contest the legality of the stop (Brendlin). Passengers can also be ordered out for safety (Wilson). If a passenger is questioned, the same Berkemer “custody” analysis applies—Miranda warnings attach when the situation becomes custodial. Legal Information Institute+1

Sobriety Checkpoints

Properly designed DUI checkpoints can be constitutional (Sitz), but practice varies by state statutes and state constitutions. If you encounter one, the rules are the same: brief stop, limited questions, and scope tailored to roadway safety. Overlong detention or investigative expansion without individualized suspicion raises Rodriguez problems. Legal Information Institute

What to Say (and Not Say)

• “Officer, here are my license and registration.”
• “I prefer not to answer questions.”
• “I do not consent to any searches.”
• “Am I free to leave?”
• If arrested: “I’m invoking my right to remain silent and my right to an attorney.”

Stay calm, be courteous, and don’t argue roadside—save it for your lawyer and the motion hearing.

If You’re Arrested: Two Tracks Begin

1. Criminal case (proof beyond a reasonable doubt): Elements typically include driving/actual physical control and impairment or per-se BAC. Expect motions on the stop, arrest, and test.
2. Administrative license action (civil): Strict, short deadlines to contest suspensions after a fail/refusal. Missing this window can cost driving privileges even if you later win the criminal case.

Quick FAQ

Do I have to take roadside SFSTs?
Often no; refusal may affect arrest decisions but typically carries fewer automatic penalties than chemical-test refusal (state-dependent).

Can I refuse a breath test? A blood test?
Breath: refusal can be penalized, sometimes criminally. Blood: generally needs a warrant; refusing a lawful test has consequences. Birchfield and McNeely set the federal floor; state statutes add teeth. Justia Law+1

The officer searched my car after giving me a ticket—legal?
Not simply because you got a citation. A full search “incident to citation” violates the Fourth Amendment (Knowles). Other exceptions (probable cause, inventory, consent) may still apply. Justia Law

The stop dragged on for a K-9 sniff—legal?
Not without new reasonable suspicion. Extending the stop beyond its traffic mission is unconstitutional (Rodriguez). Justia Law

Your Action Plan

• Within 24–48 hours: Write down everything—times, statements, conditions, meds, footwear, medical issues.
• Immediately: Calendar the administrative deadline to request a hearing.
• With counsel: Request body-cam/dash-cam, instrument logs, lab packets; analyze the Rodriguez timeline; map whether Birchfield/McNeely issues apply; assess checkpoint legality if relevant.
• Plan for driving: Explore restricted/IID options while the case is pending, if available.

Categories: DUI / DWI; Criminal Defense; DUI Defense; Search & Seizure; Implied Consent; Motion to Suppress; Field Sobriety Tests; License Suspension; Forensic Evidence

Sources & Further Reading

• Stop, Scope, and Duration
  • Rodriguez v. United States, 575 U.S. 348 (2015) (no prolonging a traffic stop for a dog sniff without RS). Oyez; Justia. {{meta.siteName}}+1
  • Navarette v. California, 572 U.S. 393 (2014) (reliable 911 tip can support RS). Justia; Cornell LII. Justia Law+1
  • Heien v. North Carolina, 574 U.S. 54 (2014) (reasonable mistake of law can support RS). Oyez; Cornell LII. {{meta.siteName}}+1
• Ordering Occupants Out / Passenger Rights
  • Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106 (1977) (driver may be ordered out). Oyez; Cornell LII. {{meta.siteName}}+1
  • Maryland v. Wilson, 519 U.S. 408 (1997) (passengers may be ordered out). Justia; Oyez. Justia Law+1
  • Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249 (2007) (passenger is “seized” and may challenge stop). Cornell LII; Oyez. Legal Information Institute+1
• Searches & Consent
  • Knowles v. Iowa, 525 U.S. 113 (1998) (no full search incident to citation). Justia; Cornell LII. Justia Law+1
• Miranda / Questioning at the Roadside
  • Berkemer v. McCarty, 468 U.S. 420 (1984) (ordinary traffic-stop questioning not “custodial” for Miranda; custody when restraint matches formal arrest). Oyez; Constitution Annotated. {{meta.siteName}}+1
• Breath vs. Blood Testing
  • Birchfield v. North Dakota, 579 U.S. ___ (2016) (breath allowed incident to arrest; blood generally not). Justia; Oyez. Justia Law+1
  • Missouri v. McNeely, 569 U.S. 141 (2013) (no per-se exigency for blood draws). Justia; Wikipedia overview for context. Justia Law+1
  • Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (1966) (exigent blood draw after crash; not testimonial). Oyez; U.S. Reports PDF. {{meta.siteName}}+1
• Checkpoints
  • Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444 (1990) (checkpoints can be constitutional). Cornell LII; Justia. Legal Information Institute

Lawyer Directory Search (“LDS”) is an informational directory only. The content on LDS—including listings, profiles, ratings, reviews, and any other materials—does not constitute legal advice, is not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney, and does not create an attorney–client relationship between you and LDS or any listed lawyer or law firm. LDS does not recommend, endorse, or guarantee any attorney, law firm, or legal service, and makes no warranties as to the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or reliability of any information provided by third parties. You should independently verify credentials and consult a licensed attorney for advice specific to your situation and jurisdiction. Do not send confidential or time-sensitive information through this site. Your use of LDS is subject to our terms, disclaimers, and policies. For full details, please review our Legal Page.