• 13
  • January
    2012

Here in Pennsylvania, drivers can face serious consequences for refusing to take a blood-alcohol-concentration (BAC) test if they have been pulled over and a police officer has reasonable grounds to suspect that they have been drinking or are otherwise under the influence.

The state's implied consent provision means that all drivers consent to BAC tests at the time that they sign their driver's license. Drivers who refuse to take a test may be penalized with a one-year license suspension.

But as one Philadelphia man learned, there are times when this law is too rigidly enforced by Pennsylvania law enforcement, and it can lead to unfair and irrational consequences.

In 2009, he attended a house party in Harrisburg with his girlfriend. She had agreed to be the designated driver that night, allowing him to drink freely and enjoy the party. While they were driving home, they were struck in a head-on collision by another driver traveling in the wrong direction.

Naturally, the crash scene was chaotic. As law enforcement worked to sort out the details of the crash, the man tried to explain that his sober girlfriend had been driving. Unfortunately, a state trooper became convinced to the contrary.

The trooper later noted that the car belonged to the defendant, who was allegedly uncooperative and smelled like alcohol. Additionally, there was blood on both the man's face and the driver's side airbag.

For these reasons, he asked the man to take a BAC test, and the defendant refused. After all, he had been drinking but was not driving at the time of the crash.

Little did he realize how much his test refusal would cost him, including his driver's license, his commercial driver's license and his job as a truck driver. Check back later this week as we continue our discussion about this controversial case.

Source: PennLive.com, "Passenger's refusal to submit to blood-alcohol test triggers 'collision between law, common sense,' lawyer says," Matt Miller, Dec. 30, 2011