Mr. Goldman’s client had a reasonably normal DUII police report. This case involved a client who refused to submit to the breathalyzer. This issue is often a weakness for us since many jurors will think the only reason a person would refuse to submit to the test is because the person thinks he will fail – attorneys might say it ‘demonstrates a consciousness of guilt’. Knowing this was a weakness, Mr. Goldman worked on turning that weakness into an advantage. Through cross examination, Mr. Goldman turned the trial into a reflection of that one portion of the facts – what happened with the breathalyzer and the refusal. He cross examined the officer on why the officer didn’t get a warrant for a blood draw after Mr. Goldman’s client refused to submit. Getting such a warrant is not unusual and can be done electronically with little difficulty. The officer admitted he didn’t do it because it was nearing the end of his shift and he just wanted to get off of work. Of course, this became the focus of Mr. Goldman’s closing statement. After 19 minutes of deliberation, the jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.