Man Falls Asleep During 18th DWI Arrest

[Brutuskend]

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. - A man arrested after a traffic stop fell asleep before an officer arrived to administer a field sobriety test. But authorities say James Lovato, 50, had been through it before ? it was his 18th arrest on a charge of drunken driving.


The DWI Resource Center, which tracks drunken driving convictions back to 1984, said Lovato has been convicted at least eight times. State records show his first arrest was in 1977. In addition, a criminal complaint against him in the latest arrest said his license has been revoked seven times.

He was charged in Saturday's incident with aggravated driving while intoxicated on a fourth or subsequent offense.

A breath test found his breath-alcohol level was 0.16 percent, twice the state's presumed level of intoxication.

Lovato was driving on a revoked license when police said they clocked him at 77 mph in a 65 mph zone on Interstate 25 north of Albuquerque.

A complaint filed in metropolitan court said police had to force Lovato's car to the side of the road to get him to stop. Police then noticed an open beer bottle near the driver's seat, and said Lovato's eyes were bloodshot and his breath smelled of alcohol.

The complaint said three open containers of beer were found in the car.

Police also said Lovato fell asleep by the time a DWI officer arrived to administer the sobriety test.

Lovato pleaded guilty last year to a charge of fourth or subsequent offense DWI and was sentenced last October to 12 months in a community custody program followed by probation.

 

[BigJ]

Why aren't people like this in jail?

 

[Mo0o]

Catapult time

 

[aplefka]

Talk about an alcoholic. Motherfvcker should have his license taken away. 18 times he could've killed people now and he's still driving.

 

[Mill]

Not to defense such an asshole, but 12 over is probable cause? WTF!!! I can't remember the last time I saw a cop pull anyone over for less than 20 over. I must admit, I'm a major speeder, but damn.

 

[blodhi74]

Originally posted by: BigJ
Why aren't people like this in jail?

what he said

 

[KarenMarie]

it is ppl like him that ruin it for everyone.

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: Mill
Not to defense such an asshole, but 12 over is probable cause? WTF!!! I can't remember the last time I saw a cop pull anyone over for less than 20 over. I must admit, I'm a major speeder, but damn.

If he fell a sleep at the wheel, I'm guessing they pulled him over because he was all over the road. Using the 77 in a 65 in the paper is merely a technicality to clear up anything.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: Mill
Not to defense such an asshole, but 12 over is probable cause? WTF!!! I can't remember the last time I saw a cop pull anyone over for less than 20 over. I must admit, I'm a major speeder, but damn.

If he fell a sleep at the wheel, I'm guessing they pulled him over because he was all over the road. Using the 77 in a 65 in the paper is merely a technicality to clear up anything.

Yeah, I just didn't see it there. I must admit, if I get pulled over for 12 over I'd laugh. Never even seen it occur before in the entire state of Alabama. Of course, if you are black... well 2mph over = instant arrest.

 

[Rock Hydra]

Originally posted by: BigJ
Why aren't people like this in jail?

Yeah. No kidding. Actaully in NY the 2nd one has your license suspended for 6 months I believe it is. The next it's a felony and license revocation. Getting to an 18th felony ridiculous on the part of motor vehicle regulations.

 

[tami]

Originally posted by: BigJ
Why aren't people like this in jail?

and why wasn't his car seized?

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: Rock Hydra

Originally posted by: BigJ
Why aren't people like this in jail?

Yeah. No kidding. Actaully in NY the 2nd one has your license suspended for 6 months I believe it is. The next it's a felony and license revocation. Getting to an 18th felony ridiculous on the part of motor vehicle regulations.

Actually, first offense is a minimum 6-month revocation, $500-$1000 fine, and up to 1 year in jail.
Second offense is a minimum 1 year revocation, $1k-$5k fine, and up to 4 years in jail.
Third offense is a minimum 1 year revocation, $2k-$10k fine, and up to 7 years in jail.

There is no reason on his 17th offense he did not serve prison time that would've kept him off the road for quite awhile.

Originally posted by: tami

Originally posted by: BigJ
Why aren't people like this in jail?

and why wasn't his car seized?

Another good point, although he may have taken someone else's car.

 

[walla]

Thank God for NM's "20 strikes and you're out" law.

 

[Brutuskend]

He wasn't falling asleep at the wheel, he just got bored waiting for officer #2 to show up to give the DUI test and fell asleep.

 

[Nomada]

Give him props for Dedication

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: Brutuskend
He wasn't falling asleep at the wheel, he just got bored waiting for officer #2 to show up to give the DUI test and fell asleep.

I realize that (not what I meant in my post), but he was probably swerving with a 0.16 if he couldn't stay awake for a few minutes.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: Brutuskend
He wasn't falling asleep at the wheel, he just got bored waiting for officer #2 to show up to give the DUI test and fell asleep.

I realize that (not what I meant in my post), but he was probably swerving with a 0.16 if he couldn't stay awake for a few minutes.

I dunno, I've seen some pretty hardcore Alky's that can blow a .16 and not even seem that impaired. The body does adjust to intoxication over time, plus everyone's motor skills and reflexes are changed in a different manner/level. Similar to why 0.5 mg of Alprazolam might be totally kosher for some (for a panic attack) but for others 2mg would be needed. It isn't even based off of weight or gender either, but predicated a lot of body chemistry. Hence why they *make* different dosages of drugs and adjust them, and that's exactly what alcohol is. Which is why saying a .16 for Bob the alcoholic is the same as a .16 for Suzy the 18 year old. Completely silly and arbitrary, but what law wouldn't be? Hence why we have lawyers.

Why do some people have a faster metabolism than others? Why are some people smarter or dumber? So what makes us think that a .16 is the same to all drivers? Ah, it couldn't be the self-righteous groups such as MADD or anything like that, could it? Not saying that driving drunk is a conscionable or forgivable action, but as always society has a hard time understanding everything and prefers to be spoonfed propaganda.

.08 is a seriously crap-ass standard anyway, and I ask that any LEO or Attorney disagree, because I know they won't. I've got tons of friends who are cops (either from work or knew them from CJ class) and of course the DA I'm seeing. They all agree that 0.08 is pure sh!t.

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: Mill

I dunno, I've seen some pretty hardcore Alky's that can blow a .16 and not even seem that impaired. The body does adjust to intoxication over time, plus everyone's motor skills and reflexes are changed in a different manner/level. Similar to why 0.5 mg of Alprazolam might be totally kosher for some (for a panic attack) but for others 2mg would be needed. It isn't even based off of weight or gender either, but predicated a lot of body chemistry. Hence why they *make* different dosages of drugs and adjust them, and that's exactly what alcohol is. Which is why saying a .16 for Bob the alcoholic is the same as a .16 for Suzy the 18 year old. Completely silly and arbitrary, but what law wouldn't be? Hence why we have lawyers.

Why do some people have a faster metabolism than others? Why are some people smarter or dumber? So what makes us think that a .16 is the same to all drivers? Ah, it couldn't be the self-righteous groups such as MADD or anything like that, could it? Not saying that driving drunk is a conscionable or forgivable action, but as always society has a hard time understanding everything and prefers to be spoonfed propaganda.

.08 is a seriously crap-ass standard anyway, and I ask that any LEO or Attorney disagree, because I know they won't. I've got tons of friends who are cops (either from work or knew them from CJ class) and of course the DA I'm seeing. They all agree that 0.08 is pure sh!t.

If the guy could really handle his booze, do you think he would've fallen asleep? Because that's pretty much what I'm using as my guideline. And in this specific case, I would think he's pretty messed up.

I've drank to the point where I'm well over a 0.25 (never driven under the influence or been in a car with someone who has), but I've never actually truly passed out (where I didn't want to fall asleep and I just couldn't control it) with anything less than 25 drinks in me.

 

[Mrvile]

This gives me more incentive to learn the alphabet backwards.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: Mill

I dunno, I've seen some pretty hardcore Alky's that can blow a .16 and not even seem that impaired. The body does adjust to intoxication over time, plus everyone's motor skills and reflexes are changed in a different manner/level. Similar to why 0.5 mg of Alprazolam might be totally kosher for some (for a panic attack) but for others 2mg would be needed. It isn't even based off of weight or gender either, but predicated a lot of body chemistry. Hence why they *make* different dosages of drugs and adjust them, and that's exactly what alcohol is. Which is why saying a .16 for Bob the alcoholic is the same as a .16 for Suzy the 18 year old. Completely silly and arbitrary, but what law wouldn't be? Hence why we have lawyers.

Why do some people have a faster metabolism than others? Why are some people smarter or dumber? So what makes us think that a .16 is the same to all drivers? Ah, it couldn't be the self-righteous groups such as MADD or anything like that, could it? Not saying that driving drunk is a conscionable or forgivable action, but as always society has a hard time understanding everything and prefers to be spoonfed propaganda.

.08 is a seriously crap-ass standard anyway, and I ask that any LEO or Attorney disagree, because I know they won't. I've got tons of friends who are cops (either from work or knew them from CJ class) and of course the DA I'm seeing. They all agree that 0.08 is pure sh!t.

If the guy could really handle his booze, do you think he would've fallen asleep? Because that's pretty much what I'm using as my guideline. And in this specific case, I would think he's pretty messed up.

I've drank to the point where I'm well over a 0.25, but I've never actually truly passed out (where I didn't want to fall asleep and I just couldn't control it) with anything less than 25 drinks in me.

He's an old geezer at 50, and was used to the routine, so he probably didn't care. I've found that 3-4 drinks tire me much more than 12. He was probably expecting jail and having to sleep anyway, so he just said fvck it.

*Disclaimer* Not defending DUIs, but just trying to add a little rational thought.

I'd like to see what he did on his FSTs or what other probable cause they had other than 12mph and "smelled alcoholic beverage" on his breath. Both are bullsh!t reasons to do a PBAT (Portable Breathalzyer Test, which are notoriously inaccurate anyway), so I'm guessing they went solely off his record and hauled him in. I'm sure he popped on NCIS or something similar and his past convictions and probation would have been a hit, so then they sure as hell were gonna take him down. I bet a 1000 bucks they didn't even FST him, because other than falling asleep he probably would've passed them being the old drunk bastard he was. They needed the Breath test, and of course the moron was gonna be over, you'd think he'd learn after 18. What a freakin' tool.

 

[xSauronx]

Originally posted by: Mill
Not to defense such an asshole, but 12 over is probable cause? WTF!!! I can't remember the last time I saw a cop pull anyone over for less than 20 over. I must admit, I'm a major speeder, but damn.

i got a ticket for 12 over in february :/

 

[SirBrass]

I think they had enough probable cause when they saw he was all over the road.

Heck, when I was a senior in HS, I was pulled over while going UNDER the limit. WHy? B/c I almost ran off the road 3 times. I was tired after a long day and driving home from my g/f's house, and route 460 is almost HYPNOTIC at night. I kept dozing off. Cop that pulled me over thought I was drunk from how I was driving (not all over the road, but he pulled me over after I almost went off a bridge). Once he saw that I was completely sober, but very tired, he still did the field sobriety test...probably to wake me up (it sure did).

If a cop sees someone driving dangerously, or suspiciously, they have enough probable cause to pull that person over, so their reasoning-despite your oh-so-learned insisting-is NOT bullcrap.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: SirBrass
I think they had enough probable cause when they saw he was all over the road.

Heck, when I was a senior in HS, I was pulled over while going UNDER the limit. WHy? B/c I almost ran off the road 3 times. I was tired after a long day and driving home from my g/f's house, and route 460 is almost HYPNOTIC at night. I kept dozing off. Cop that pulled me over thought I was drunk from how I was driving (not all over the road, but he pulled me over after I almost went off a bridge). Once he saw that I was completely sober, but very tired, he still did the field sobriety test...probably to wake me up (it sure did).

If a cop sees someone driving dangerously, or suspiciously, they have enough probable cause to pull that person over, so their reasoning-despite your oh-so-learned insisting-is NOT bullcrap.

Where does it say in the OP or article that he was driving dangerously or suspiciously? If speeding is probable cause then 95% of the population is a goddamn axe-murderer. The problem is you gave a half-assed reading of the article, have zero clue of the law, and then you decided to make a smart-assed post after confusing what someone said in the THREAD with what was in the article.

Again, was this a PABT, or one at the station? Was it calibrated properly in the recent history? What was the result of the FST, if any were done? Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus or walk-and-turn? Where the FSTs performed on level ground, or one a hill? How trained was the officer, and what experience did he have? Did he give explicit FST instructions if he did any FSTs at all?

All I was saying is speeding alone isn't probable cause alone, and neither is the odor of an alcoholic beverage (although it varies by state and case law), but needless to say I'm sure this guys record popped and they took him in based solely on that. Glad that they did, but I'm speaking generally here.

 

[V00DOO]

Originally posted by: BigJ
Why aren't people like this in jail?

Becuase there is no money senting him to jail. I am suprise he hasn't kill anyone yet. 18 DUI's are freaking outrageous.

 

[Landroval]

life in prison