Common Documentation Errors in DUI Investigations and Why They Matter
Overview
Documentation is the foundation of a DUI investigation. Reports, notes, forms, timestamps, and checklists all contribute to the state’s narrative, but they often contain omissions, inconsistencies, or mistakes that weaken probable cause and undermine reliability.
Attorneys rely on Zachary Marshall to identify these issues because even small inconsistencies can shift leverage in negotiation, suppression, or trial. As a DUI and collision consultant based in Arlington, WA, Zach Marshall reviews documentation with a structured, technical approach that clarifies what the evidence actually shows.
Incomplete or Contradictory Notes
One of the most common issues involves missing or conflicting information. Zach reviews:
Notes that differ from bodycam
SFST descriptions that do not match video
Clues listed but not visible
Missing timestamps
Unexplained gaps in the officer’s narrative
These inconsistencies are often central to cross examination or motion work.
Boilerplate Language
Many DUI reports contain standardized language that does not actually reflect what occurred. Zach evaluates:
Copy and pasted articulation
Generic impairment statements
Repetitive phrases with no case specific detail
Descriptions that do not match the environment or subject behavior
Boilerplate articulation frequently weakens reliability because it shows the officer did not create a genuine, observation-driven report.
Timeline Errors
Accurate timing is critical in DUI cases. Zachary analyzes:
Incorrect sequencing
Confusion between the phases of the investigation
Gaps between vehicle stop and contact
Delays that are not documented
Inconsistencies with bodycam timestamps
Timeline errors often impact probable cause, reasonable suspicion, and breath test reliability.
SFST Documentation Problems
Officers often misdocument standardized tests. Zach reviews:
Incorrectly listed clues
Unclear instruction descriptions
Missing conditions (surface slope, footwear, lighting)
Discrepancies between report and actual performance
SFST scoring that does not align with NHTSA standards
These issues frequently reveal that the officer overstated or misinterpreted performance.
Poor Articulation of Driving Behavior
Impairment narratives often rely on driving behavior. Zach evaluates:
Descriptions of swerving that video does not support
Claims of lane travel issues contradicted by footage
Vague language such as “poor driving” without detail
Inconsistent statements about speed or distance
Driving behavior is often one of the most overstated areas of the report.
Lack of Environmental Context
Reports often ignore important environmental details that impacted performance. Zachary looks for:
Weather
Footwear
Surface irregularities
Traffic noise
Lighting
Distractions or interruptions
Subject medical limitations
Context is essential for understanding why performance looked the way it did.
Mischaracterization of Subject Behavior
Officers sometimes describe behaviors in ways that do not align with what is seen on camera. Zach evaluates:
Nervousness mischaracterized as impairment
Slow movement described as lethargy
Clear communication ignored in articulation
Cooperative behavior downplayed
Non-impaired behavior reframed as impairment indicators
Accurate behavioral analysis is essential for a fair evaluation.
Why Documentation Matters for Attorneys
Defense attorneys contact Zach Marshall because documentation issues become:
Leverage points in negotiation
Grounds for suppression
Pathways to challenge probable cause
Tools for reshaping the narrative
Clear trial themes
Opportunities to expose investigative shortcuts
A strong documentation analysis can shift the trajectory of both DUI and personal injury cases.
Contact
For documentation review, DUI evaluation, or litigation support, contact:
Zachary Marshall
Founder and Lead Consultant
Legal Limit Consulting, LLC
Arlington, Washington
Phone: (425) 224 5149
Email: Z.Marshall@LegalLimitConsulting.com
Website: www.LegalLimitConsulting.com
