Michigan: Man With 0.00 BAC Sues Over DUI Charge

The Newspaper
by The Newspaper
michigan man with 0 00 bac sues over dui charge

Motorist Paul Miller filed a federal lawsuit against Sanilac County, Michigan sheriff’s department after he was accused of driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) despite being completely sober. The US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit earlier this month ruled that his case should be tried by a jury.

On February 19, 2006, Miller had been driving home from a demolition derby at around midnight on a cold, icy evening. Miller drove through a stop sign, unable to stop because of the slick road conditions, as Deputy Sheriff Jim Wagester watched. Wagester pulled Miller over claiming that he had been driving 60 MPH without a seatbelt, that he failed to immediately pull over, that his eyes were “glassy” and that he “detect[ed] a slight odor of alcohol coming from [Miller’s] breath.” Miller said that Wagester fabricated the charges.

After learning that Miller had been arrested once before for DUI, Wagester administered five standard field sobriety tests in the freezing weather, insisting that Miller failed four of them. Miller refused a breathalyzer test, saying he only trusted the accuracy of blood tests. Wagester responded by slamming Miller against his patrol car, handcuffing him and driving him to a hospital for the blood test. Wagester charged miller with: failure to use a seatbelt, no proof of registration, no proof of insurance, reckless driving, refusal to submit to a breath test, minor in possession, and 0.02 percent blood-alcohol-no-tolerance-law violation.

The lab eventually reported that Miller’s blood alcohol concentration (BAC) was 0.00 and that he tested negative for narcotics. Although police dropped the charges, Miller sued for excessive force, false arrest and malicious prosecution.

The court of appeals threw out the malicious prosecution charge as they related to the civil infractions like failure to wear a seatbelt and refusing a breath test. Only criminal charges like DUI could be considered malicious prosecution, so the appeals court found that a jury should decide whether Wagester had probable cause to arrest to determine whether the criminal prosecution was malicious.

“The fact that Miller’s blood alcohol was found to be 0.00 percent casts doubt on Deputy Wagester’s claims that Miller smelled of alcohol and failed the field sobriety tests,” Judge Gilbert S Merritt Jr wrote for the majority. “Although Wagester’s claims, if believed, would constitute probable cause to arrest for driving under the influence of alcohol, a jury could reasonably conclude, in light of the 0.00 percent blood alcohol result and Miller’s testimony, that Wagester was being untruthful generally about his observations and did not have probable cause to believe Miller was drinking. In light of the conflict in the evidence, the jury could conclude that Wagester was lying.”

The court also questioned the reckless driving charge because the icy conditions represented a mitigating circumstance. Because the reckless driving charge requires a showing of “wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property” the icy conditions create a factual question for the jury. The court found absolutely no evidence for Wagester’s filing of the minor in possession charge.

The court dismissed the claims against the county government and some of the excessive force claims but upheld Miller’s remaining points as fit for being decided by a jury.

View a copy of the decision in a 75k PDF file.

Miller v. Sanilac County (US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, 6/4/2010)

[ Courtesy:TheNewspaper.com]

Join the conversation
3 of 26 comments
  • Obbop Obbop on Jun 23, 2010

    Looking at a "larger picture" I fear that too many law enforcement bureaucracies have been trained and encouraged to become a "distancing force" to isolate ruling elites from the masses of commoners below them. Obey authority no matter what, even if that authority is not worthy of being obeyed by a supposedly free citizenry. Fear the power held over you. Obey. Do not question. Obey. Fear the power wielded by those wanting to defend the status quo. Free thinkers no longer wanted within the USA; even those civil-minded and a benefit to the society and the common good. It is more important to obey. Follow the "party line." Simply obey. It is a new era in the USA and dissidence from what our ruling class wants and desires is not allowed or tolerated. OBEY without question for if you are not for the ruling class and their minions you surely must be against them.

  • Jim K Jim K on Jun 24, 2010

    +1000% to everything Porschespeed has said. I've known quite a number of excellent police officers in my time, but as a whole I believe they abusive, power hungry bullies whose authority, badges and guns give them the feelings they can do whatever they want without recourse. I always thought they had to obey the same laws we do? The majority of them believe they are above the law. I have no idea how we reverse this trend.....but the escalating police state of this country worries me for our future.

    • Porschespeed Porschespeed on Jun 24, 2010

      Thanks Jim, 'Positions of power' do tend to disproportionally attract those with issues - but, that does not make all cops bad people. But any bad system will corrupt most, and eventually run out those that they can't corrupt. I'm with you, I'm not quite sure what the solution is. But I do know that acceptance is not the answer. I am pretty damn sure about the cause though. With nomenclature of "war on drugs/crime/dwi/whatever" we have suddenly turned police into soldiers. Between that and Gates spurring the development of paramilitary policing it looks like you're kicking ass and taking names. Sadly, it doesn't produce long-term positive results. For those who didn't catch it in school, or just have forgotten, please go back and checkout the Stanford Prison Experiment. The 'above the law' part is truly the most troubling. We all know about professional courtesy, but when a cop is finally taken down for an offense that would land an average white guy in prison for 10 years, the judge will often give them 5 years unsupervised probation.

  • Alan I think this vehicle is aimed more at the dedicated offroad traveller. It costs around the same a 300 Series, so its quite an investment. It would be a waste to own as a daily driver, unless you want to be seen in a 'wank' vehicle like many Wrangler and Can Hardly Davidson types.The diesel would be the choice for off roading as its quite torquey down low and would return far superior mileage than a petrol vehicle.I would think this is more reliable than the Land Rovers, BMW make good engines. https://www.drive.com.au/reviews/2023-ineos-grenadier-review/
  • Lorenzo I'll go with Stellantis. Last into the folly, first to bail out. Their European business won't fly with the German market being squeezed on electricity. Anybody can see the loss of Russian natural gas and closing their nuclear plants means high cost electricity. They're now buying electrons from French nuclear plants, as are the British after shutting down their coal industry. As for the American market, the American grid isn't in great shape either, but the US has shale oil and natural gas. Stellantis has profits from ICE Ram trucks and Jeeps, and they won't give that up.
  • Inside Looking Out Chinese will take over EV market and Tesla will become the richest and largest car company in the world. Forget about Japanese.
  • Joe These guys are asking way to much.. 40% raise, Medical for retired workers, 4 day work week. - Go work a regular job like as an accountant, or Insurance agent and see what you get when you retire! Why do I have to put money in a 401K and these guys get a pension and medical for life. Cars are already to expensive! However at the same time GM is bragging that they are going to be making billions on subscription services in the coming years. If we could all stop being so greedy the world would be a better place
  • Tele Vision Let's not forget the massive used ICE car market that will exist - even after mandated EVs for all.