What Signs of Intoxication Do Police Look for during DUI Stops?

Answer:

Georgia DUI investigations follow a structured, multi-phase process based on NHTSA training standards. Before initiating a stop, officers watch for specific driving cues correlated with elevated BAC — including weaving, swerving, wide-radius turns, erratic speed, driving without headlights, and failure to signal. During initial vehicle contact, officers observe for the odor of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot or watery eyes, difficulty handling documents, open containers, and admissions of drinking. After asking the driver to exit, officers note difficulty exiting, swaying, stumbling, and needing the vehicle for support. All observations are documented in the arrest report and captured on body camera and dashcam. Many of these signs — red eyes, alcohol odor, nervousness — are not exclusive to impairment and can result from fatigue, allergies, or anxiety, and defense counsel regularly challenges overstated characterizations against available video.

DUI investigations in Georgia are structured, systematic processes informed by training standards developed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Officers are trained to observe and document specific, recognized indicators of impairment at every stage of the encounter — from the initial observation of the vehicle in traffic, through the roadside investigation, and including the in-vehicle contact. Understanding what officers are trained to look for, and how these observations are used to build a DUI case, is essential both for drivers and for anyone defending against a DUI charge.

Pre-Stop Observations: Driving Behavior

Before an officer ever activates their lights to initiate a traffic stop, they are trained under NHTSA’s DWI Detection and Standardized Field Sobriety Testing curriculum to look for specific driving patterns associated with alcohol impairment. NHTSA has identified 24 visual cues for detecting DWI from moving vehicles, organized by the phase of driving in which they are most commonly observed.

The most predictive cues for impairment in this phase include: weaving within a lane or across lane lines; swerving; turning with wide radius; nearly striking objects or other vehicles; stopping inappropriately; following too closely; drifting; driving on the wrong side of the road; driving at erratic speeds; driving without headlights; and failing to signal lane changes. NHTSA’s research correlates these cues with specific likelihoods that the driver’s blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is at or above 0.08 grams.

Officers document these pre-stop observations in their reports because they form part of the probable cause narrative for the arrest. Defense counsel in DUI cases will scrutinize these observations against dashcam footage to determine whether they are accurately characterized, whether they are consistent with innocent explanations (road conditions, mechanical issues, distracted driving), and whether the specific cues observed actually support the BAC range the officer claims to have suspected.

Initial Contact: The Vehicle Approach

When the officer approaches the stopped vehicle, they are simultaneously gathering evidence and issuing lawful commands. NHTSA training identifies several specific indicators to observe during the initial contact phase:

Odor of alcoholic beverages — the presence of an alcohol odor emanating from the vehicle or the driver’s breath. Officers are trained to note this observation specifically, though odor alone does not establish the degree of impairment.
Slurred or thick-tongued speech — indicative of central nervous system impairment affecting motor control of the speech apparatus.
Bloodshot, watery, or red eyes — associated with alcohol consumption, though also consistent with fatigue, allergies, contact lenses, smoke exposure, or crying.
Fumbling with documents — difficulty locating and handling the driver’s license and registration, suggesting impaired fine motor coordination.
Admission of alcohol consumption — any statement by the driver acknowledging that they have been drinking, regardless of the amount claimed. Officers document the exact words used.
Open containers — visible alcoholic beverage containers in the passenger compartment.
Inappropriate or unusual behavior — responses to questions that are inconsistent, confused, or suggest cognitive impairment.

Every observation the officer makes during this phase is recorded in real time on body camera and dashcam. These recordings frequently become the most contested evidence in DUI cases — defense counsel will compare the officer’s written report against the footage to identify characterizations that are inaccurate or overstated.

Exit and Pre-Test Observations

If the officer’s initial contact observations support continued investigation, the driver will typically be asked to exit the vehicle. Officers are trained to observe: difficulty exiting the vehicle; inability to stand steadily; stumbling or staggering; swaying while standing; and the need to use the vehicle for support. These observations — like all others in a DUI investigation — are documented and may be presented to a jury as evidence of impairment.

Following the exit from the vehicle, the officer will administer field sobriety tests (if consented to) and, upon arrest, will provide the implied consent warning and request a chemical test. All observations made throughout this process are consolidated into the officer’s arrest report, which becomes part of the prosecution’s evidence package.

How Defense Attorneys Challenge DUI Observations

The systematic nature of NHTSA-trained DUI observation creates a well-defined target for defense challenge. Defense counsel in Georgia DUI cases will: compare each observation in the officer’s written report against available video footage; identify innocent explanations for the observed signs (fatigue, medical conditions, nervousness, road conditions); challenge the officer’s training and whether they properly followed NHTSA protocols; retain experts in alcohol pharmacokinetics who can testify about the relationship between the observed signs and actual impairment; and attack the characterization of equivocal observations as indicative of impairment when they are consistent with sobriety.

Many of the cues officers observe — red eyes, strong odor of alcohol, nervousness, difficulty with documents — are not exclusive to alcohol impairment and can be fully explained by factors unrelated to DUI. A defense strategy that systematically provides the jury with innocent explanations for each observation can undermine the cumulative weight of the officer’s testimony and create reasonable doubt even in cases where some alcohol consumption occurred.

Brett and his team were beyond supportive, helpful, gracious, caring and knowledgeable! We went through the most challenging and difficult time in our life and he was there every step of the way. With results we could never have imagined but definitely prayed for.

Not to mention his level of professionalism. From the first time we spoke to the first time we saw him in court. He stood out from almost every other attorney there. We were so appreciative that our attorney looked and was so professional, pulled together and prepared. When so many others were none of these things.

Thank you just doesn’t seem like enough to convey our feelings and appreciation.

Karen L.

I tried to write this several times and it brought me to tears. First may I say this has been the hardest three years of my life. Five lawyers I interviewed and none even understood the law as it applied to my case. So I thought I would try one more and it was Brett. From our first conversation together I knew he understood the law and was the perfect one for the case. I want to say how he prepared the case and presented it, achieving a full dismissal and ruling the police violated my first amendment rights. Complete genius!!!!

If you're reading this review and unsure, stop...call Brett. He always returned my call or texts within a couple hours, never more than 24 hours. He was always courteous and knowledgeable, trust me he talked me off the ledge a couple times. I would have given him 10 stars but 5 was the only option. Thank you Brett for all you did for me!!!!!