Some guy was pulled over for DWI ... and he refused to take the sobriety test (in most states its considered an admission of guilt) ... so he was arrested/charged/tride (tried?) and convicted.
He took it to the NJ Supreme court and damned if he didn't win!
So he argued the faults of sobriety tests right? He argued that refusal can not be seen He as guilt because of the 5th admendment, right?
He argued that since he didn't speak English, even though he had an US liscense, and the officers didn't offer a translator to him at the time they asked for the sobriety test ... that he could not give informed consent/refusal.
Okay while this may be ... if he had a US liscense -- why the hell didn't he understand/read/speak English???????
Granted, this guy only spoke Spanish - and how hard is it, really, to get a spanish translator these days? Surely there were officers who spoke it who could have been on scene in less than 10minutes.
So now the small towns in NJ (and other states) ... will have to devote TAX DOLLARS to have available translators for suspects in the following languages:
the US wants to be sooooooo much like those "other countries", why don't we handle it their way??
If you don't know the law of their lands ....
BTW - the DUI still stands, but the fact that he refused to take the test couldn't be used against him.