#image_title
Are you or someone you know facing a DUI charge despite a lack of concrete evidence placing you behind the wheel? It is a common scenario and the attorneys at the Marc Lopez Law Firm often receive calls from individuals facing this exact predicament. They express frustration, saying, “I wasn’t driving, but I’m being charged with drunk driving. There’s no evidence.” If you are grappling with DUI charges, even though there is a lack of tangible evidence? If so, keep reading as we go through this exact scenario and what you can do—including the importance of hiring an attorney.
In these types of situations, the underlying issue often involves weak evidence of driving. For example, a crashed car is discovered with the airbags deployed, the client is located half a mile away or even comfortably at home, and his face has multiple scratches. His spouse insists, “he was driving,” but the client either remains silent on the matter or provides only circumstantial evidence of being at the wheel. Even with all this, charges are still filed against him.
Understanding the nuances of DUI laws is crucial, especially in Indiana, where the crime is technically Operative a Vehicle While Intoxicated. Conviction of DUI charges hinges on the State proving beyond a reasonable doubt that you were operating the vehicle. The interpretation of “beyond a reasonable doubt,” however, tends to be more flexible in DUI cases.
When a case has weak evidence, you may be wondering if the prosecution can even include it in your case at all. According to Indiana’s Rules of Evidence, weak evidence is not, strictly speaking, prohibited. Rules 401 and 402 are important to review:
“Rule 401.
Evidence is relevant if:
(1) It has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence; and
(2) The fact is of consequence in determining the action.
Rule 402.
Relevant evidence is admissible unless any of the following provides otherwise:
(1) the United States Constitution;
(2) the Indiana constitution;
(3) a statute not in conflict with these rules;
(4) these rules; or
(5) other rules applicable in the courts of this state.
Irrelevant evidence is not admissible.”
So what does this mean? Although irrelevant evidence is not admissible, sometimes determining whether a certain piece of evidence would qualify as “weak” or “irrelevant” is difficult. While it is true that charges can be filed against you based on weak evidence, securing a conviction requires at least some proof of driving or operation In Indiana, this distinction is crucial and why it is important to hire an attorney who understands the technicalities of the law and knows when, how and what to push the prosecutors for.
The attorneys at the Marc Lopez Law Firm have helped thousands of clients with detailed evaluation of the evidence involved in their Indiana DUI cases. If you believe the evidence in your case is weak, our criminal defense attorneys can let you know the best course of action to fight the charges brought against you.
If you or someone you know is facing charges for a DUI despite weak evidence, it is essential to reach out to an Indiana criminal defense attorney. When you are navigating the intricacies of a DUI charge, it is crucial to remember the importance of protecting your rights.
The attorneys at the Marc Lopez Law Firm are committed to protecting your rights and providing the best possible defense. Our legal team is here to help you every step of the way. Give us a call at 463-946-0521, and remember—always plead the 5th!