New Hampshire DWI Lawyer Ryan Russman’s Case Histories

Attorney Ryan Russman has amassed a stellar winning record on behalf of clients arrested for Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) in New Hampshire.

Before appointing him as their DWI lawyer, most defendants were convinced that under NH DWI laws, they would receive a harsh penalty – some repeat offenders even feared jail time. Here are a few highlights of what actually happened, drawn from the extensive case files of Ryan Russman – the NH DWI lawyer you want fighting for you..

Case 1

Melissa B. was charged with her third DWI offense. She was stopped because she crossed the yellow line twice and the white line once. After the stop, she performed three field sobriety tests: the HGN (also known as the “eye test,”) the walk and turn test, and the one leg stand test. According to the arresting officer, she failed all three. Once taken to the police station and refusing to take a breath test; her license was automatically suspended per New Hampshire DWI laws.

At the DMV hearing on the refusal, I was able to discredit the officer’s testimony through cross-examination on the field sobriety tests. Ten days after the hearing, the DMV issued an order dismissing the license suspension, citing that the officer did not have a reasonable basis to order a test. The case proceeded to trial in the District Court. At the conclusion of the State’s case, I moved to dismiss because the State had failed to properly provide the foundation for the prior convictions. The Court dismissed the Case as the State had failed to meet its evidentiary burden.

Case 2

Robert R. was charged with a second offense of driving while intoxicated and aggravated DWI. He was stopped for going the wrong way up a one-way street. The officer ordered my client out of the car and had him perform two field sobriety tests. After the tests were completed, Robert R. was arrested and subsequently submitted to a breath test. The results indicated he had a Blood to Breath Alcohol level of a .23--almost three times the legal limit of .08.

At the DMV hearing, I was able to exclude the Breath Test because the Certification for the Intoxilyzer was not properly filled out. The DMV dismissed the State’s petition to revoke his license for two years.

At trial in the District Court, I attacked the field sobriety tests as not accurately portraying my client’s sobriety. The client had a large laceration on his foot and his balance was affected by his injury. I also attacked the police for failing to administer a complete battery of tests to rule out other possible causes for his performance. Additionally, I was able to exclude the breath result; again, the State was unable to establish that the .23 result was accurate when the certification records reflected an error.

Case 3

Michael M. was charged with Aggravated DWI. He crashed his car and flipped over. The police arrived on the scene and had him perform a battery of field sobriety tests. The officer determined that the observations on the HGN, Walk and Turn and One Leg Stand test indicated he was impaired. He was subsequently arrested and took a blood test that revealed a .17 Blood Alcohol Level.

At the DMV hearing, I was able to exclude the .17 result as the State had failed to provide the sample to him within the statutory time frame and they had failed to preserve the second sample. I made a motion to exclude the blood test and the Court threw out the result. After the State rested I moved to dismiss, stating that the State had failed to prove that the observations of the officer were as a result of impairment by alcohol and not the crash. The Court agreed.

Case 4

Twenty-year-old Jeannie V. was stopped because she had a tail light out. She performed the field sobriety test in high heals and the officer failed her on the Walk and Turn and the One Leg Stand. She was charged with DWI. Ms. V. was taken back to the police station where she submitted to a breath test, with a result of .06. For individuals under 21 the limit is .02.

At the DMV hearing, I moved to dismiss because the State failed to wait the required twenty minutes before administering the test. The case proceeded in the District Court. The State did not attempt to enter the results into trial because they knew the Court would exclude them. The State did attempt to convict my client on the performance of the field sobriety tests. However, I pointed out that the tests should not be performed in high heals and the officer improperly demonstrated the walk and turn tests. The Court dismissed her case.

-Ryan Russman