9621 Agnes Crossing, Lake Suzanneview, New Mexico Island 84604-9295.
An incorrectly drawn up protocol against a driver is usually a good reason to cancel the penalty for violating traffic rules. However, it seems that this practice has
A resident of the Arkhangelsk region, Leonid E., was attacked. In early September last year, he got drunk and decided to drive around a field near the village of Slobodka, in the Vilegodsky district of this region. This conclusion can be drawn from the thin lines of the Supreme Court’s ruling. It is not known what actually took the citizen “to the pampas” while driving his Opel Zafira. Court documents also do not reveal why a local traffic police patrol was in a field outside the village. There is a suspicion that one of our hero’s good neighbors hinted to law enforcement officers that a fellow villager had gone on a car alcohol tour. And the latter, seeing that a traffic police car was following him, tried to avoid an unwanted meeting by disappearing into the meadows.
The idea clearly did not work and representatives of the law overtook the driver from the asphalt. Because he smelled a characteristic odor, the police asked him to ‘take a breath test’. The citizen did not object. The result of the test was a quite significant indicator: 0.231 mg/l of alcohol in the exhaled air. At normal levels – no more than 0.16 mg/l. This confirmed the inspectors’ hypothesis about the level of sobriety of the car owner.
A protocol was drawn up, which, together with other accompanying papers, ended up on the table of the magistrate of court No. 2 of the Kozhemyaksky district of the Arkhangelsk region. The judgment was pronounced on December 7, 2022: on the basis of part 1 of art. 12.8 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, the driver was fined 30,000 rubles and deprived of his “rights” for a year and a half. At first glance everything is clear. If it’s not just one ‘but’.
Leonid E.’s car was stopped in a field, about 100 meters from house No. 15 in the village of Slobodka, Vilegodsky district, Arkhangelsk region. And in the protocol on the administrative violation and on the paper “receipt” of the breath test, the traffic police officer who recorded the incident indicated a completely different location of the event: the village of Sloboda. This means that the documents have been drawn up factually incorrectly.
Despite this discrepancy, the magistrate issued a punitive ‘sentence’. The latter disagreed and appealed the decision to higher courts. Ultimately, the case reached the Supreme Court. The latter concluded that “circumstances that could lead to amendment or withdrawal of the contested judicial acts have not been established.” And he upheld the suspension of Leonid E.’s driver’s license.
There is no doubt that drunk driving is extremely dangerous and that your “rights” should be revoked for it. But from all this it logically follows from the decision of the Supreme Court that a police officer when drawing up a protocol “for drunkenness” can make almost any mistakes – the driver will still be deprived of his driver’s license. It is interesting when the police officer mixes up not the name of the location, but the driver’s license details of a drunken citizen: who would ultimately be punished: him or someone innocent? It appears that the judge is not allowed to concern himself too much with the formalities of the violation protocol presented to him. It will be enough for him to see at whom the traffic policeman “points the finger”, and he will deprive him of his “rights”.
A resident of the Arkhangelsk region, Leonid E., was attacked. In early September last year, he got drunk and decided to drive around a field near the village of Slobodka, in the Vilegodsky district of this region. This conclusion can be drawn from the thin lines of the Supreme Court’s ruling. It is not known what actually took the citizen “to the pampas” while driving his Opel Zafira. Court documents also do not reveal why a local traffic police patrol was in a field outside the village. There is a suspicion that one of our hero’s good neighbors hinted to law enforcement officers that a fellow villager had gone on a car alcohol tour. And the latter, seeing that a traffic police car was following him, tried to avoid an unwanted meeting by disappearing into the meadows.
The idea clearly did not work and representatives of the law overtook the driver from the asphalt. Because he smelled a characteristic odor, the police asked him to ‘take a breath test’. The citizen did not object. The result of the test was a quite significant indicator: 0.231 mg/l of alcohol in the exhaled air. At normal levels – no more than 0.16 mg/l. This confirmed the inspectors’ hypothesis about the level of sobriety of the car owner.
A protocol was drawn up, which, together with other accompanying papers, ended up on the table of the magistrate of court No. 2 of the Kozhemyaksky district of the Arkhangelsk region. The judgment was pronounced on December 7, 2022: on the basis of part 1 of art. 12.8 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, the driver was fined 30,000 rubles and deprived of his “rights” for a year and a half. At first glance everything is clear. If it’s not just one ‘but’.
Leonid E.’s car was stopped in a field, about 100 meters from house No. 15 in the village of Slobodka, Vilegodsky district, Arkhangelsk region. And in the protocol on the administrative violation and on the paper “receipt” of the breath test, the traffic police officer who recorded the incident indicated a completely different location of the event: the village of Sloboda. This means that the documents have been drawn up factually incorrectly.
Despite this discrepancy, the magistrate issued a punitive ‘sentence’. The latter disagreed and appealed the decision to higher courts. Ultimately, the case reached the Supreme Court. The latter concluded that “circumstances that could lead to amendment or withdrawal of the contested judicial acts have not been established.” And he upheld the suspension of Leonid E.’s driver’s license.
There is no doubt that drunk driving is extremely dangerous and that your “rights” should be revoked for it. But from all this it logically follows from the decision of the Supreme Court that a police officer when drawing up a protocol “for drunkenness” can make almost any mistakes – the driver will still be deprived of his driver’s license. It is interesting when the police officer mixes up not the name of the location, but the driver’s license details of a drunken citizen: who would ultimately be punished: him or someone innocent? It appears that the judge is not allowed to concern himself too much with the formalities of the violation protocol presented to him. It will be enough for him to see at whom the traffic policeman “points the finger”, and he will deprive him of his “rights”.
Source: Avto Vzglyad
Donald Salinas is an experienced automobile journalist and writer for Div Bracket. He brings his readers the latest news and developments from the world of automobiles, offering a unique and knowledgeable perspective on the latest trends and innovations in the automotive industry.
