A DUI arrest is a high-pressure, disorienting event, and the decisions made in the minutes and hours that follow can have a decisive impact on the outcome of the case. Georgia’s DUI law is procedurally complex, and law enforcement is trained to build the strongest possible case from the moment of the traffic stop. Understanding the most common—and most damaging—mistakes defendants make after a DUI arrest is essential for anyone who has been charged or who wants to be prepared.

Mistake One: Consenting to a Chemical Test

The single most consequential mistake a person can make after a DUI arrest in Georgia is consenting to a blood, breath, or urine test. This is also, by a wide margin, the most common mistake. The reason people consent is understandable: when an officer reads Georgia’s implied consent notice under O.C.G.A. § 40-5-67.1, the notice warns that refusal will result in a license suspension of up to one year. Faced with that warning, many people conclude that submitting to the test is the safer choice. In most cases, that conclusion is wrong.

What the implied consent notice does not explain is that a chemical test result—particularly a breath test showing a BAC at or above the legal limit—hands the prosecution its most powerful piece of evidence. A confirmed BAC reading of 0.08 or above creates a statutory presumption of impairment under O.C.G.A. § 40-6-391(a)(5) and makes the case far more difficult to defend. For drug-related DUIs, a blood test confirming the presence of a controlled substance in the defendant’s system similarly strengthens the State’s case substantially.

By contrast, when no chemical test result exists, the prosecution must rely entirely on the arresting officer’s subjective observations and the defendant’s performance on field sobriety tests—a significantly weaker evidentiary foundation. Cases without chemical test evidence are charged as “less safe” DUIs under O.C.G.A. § 40-6-391(a)(1) and are substantially more likely to result in a dismissal, reduction to reckless driving, or acquittal at trial.

The administrative consequences of refusal—while real—are often more manageable than the criminal consequences of a DUI conviction supported by a confirmed chemical test. A license suspension resulting from refusal may be contested through the administrative license suspension (ALS) process, and a limited driving permit may be available in some circumstances. A DUI conviction, by contrast, carries criminal penalties, a permanent record, and collateral consequences that far exceed the impact of an administrative license suspension.

Mistake Two: Talking to Law Enforcement Without an Attorney

After an arrest, officers frequently attempt to engage the defendant in conversation—asking where they were coming from, how much they had to drink, whether they take any medications, or inviting the defendant to “explain” the situation. This is investigative questioning, and anything said in response is recorded and will be used in the prosecution’s case.

The Fifth Amendment right to remain silent applies from the moment of arrest. Invoking that right is straightforward: “I am invoking my right to remain silent and I want an attorney.” Once those words are spoken, law enforcement is constitutionally required to cease questioning. No explanation, however seemingly harmless, should be offered without counsel present. Statements that appear exculpatory—“I only had two beers” or “I was just tired”—frequently become the prosecution’s evidence of impairment at trial.

Mistake Three: Performing Field Sobriety Tests

Field sobriety tests—the walk-and-turn, one-leg stand, and horizontal gaze nystagmus test—are voluntary in Georgia. The Georgia Supreme Court has held that the right against self-incrimination under the Georgia Constitution protects the refusal to perform field sobriety tests, and that refusal cannot be disclosed to a jury as evidence of guilt. Despite this, many people comply with officers’ requests to perform these tests, believing compliance will demonstrate sobriety.

In practice, field sobriety tests are administered and evaluated by the arresting officer, who has already formed a preliminary conclusion that the driver may be impaired. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) standardized tests have specific administration protocols, and even minor technical errors in how the officer conducts the test can render the results unreliable. However, when a defendant performs the tests, the officer’s evaluation of that performance—however subjective—becomes part of the prosecution’s case. Declining to perform the tests eliminates this source of evidence entirely.

Mistake Four: Making Statements or Posts on Social Media

Social media posts, text messages, and other electronic communications made before, during, and after a DUI arrest are frequently reviewed by investigators and prosecutors. A photograph posted before the arrest showing the defendant at a bar, a text message sent while driving, or a post describing the evening’s activities can all be used as evidence of alcohol consumption and potentially of impaired judgment. Following an arrest, defendants should refrain from any social media activity related to the incident and should discuss the facts of the case only with their attorney.

Mistake Five: Failing to Request an Administrative License Suspension Hearing

When a driver in Georgia either fails a chemical test or refuses one following a DUI arrest, the Georgia Department of Driver Services initiates an administrative license suspension (ALS) proceeding that is entirely separate from the criminal case. Under O.C.G.A. § 40-5-67.1, the driver has only 30 days from the date of arrest to request a hearing before the Office of State Administrative Hearings (OSAH) to contest the suspension. If that deadline is missed, the suspension becomes automatic and the defendant loses the opportunity to challenge it.

The ALS hearing is not simply an administrative formality—it provides defense counsel with a critical early opportunity to examine the arresting officer under oath, obtain sworn testimony about the stop and arrest, and identify weaknesses in the State’s evidence before the criminal case proceeds. Defense attorneys who conduct ALS hearings aggressively often develop information that directly benefits the criminal defense. Missing the 30-day window forfeits both the hearing and this valuable discovery opportunity.

Mistake Six: Waiting to Retain Defense Counsel

Time works against the defendant in a DUI case. Evidence must be preserved before it disappears: body camera footage may be overwritten, dashcam recordings may be deleted, witness recollections fade, and the 30-day ALS deadline approaches regardless of whether the defendant has sought legal representation. Retaining an experienced Georgia DUI defense attorney immediately after arrest ensures that all available defenses are identified, all relevant evidence is preserved, and the ALS hearing deadline is met. The earlier counsel is retained, the greater the opportunity to shape the outcome of both the administrative and criminal proceedings.