I was recently at Phillies game and met with one of my former DUI colleagues from the prosecutorial side of the aisle. I was telling him about my "Pulled Over for a Pennsylvania DUI Article" on my new web page. During the game, we engaged in some friendly banter. I told him that if represented a client that refused a field sobriety testing he would not have a chance to obtain a DUI conviction against my client in a Pennsylvania court. He retorted, "of course I would, I would simply tell the judge or jury, that your client's refusal to submit to field sobriety testing indicates their consciousness of guilt." He continued to point out that the case law allows the prosecution to bring up at trial that the refusal of a suspect to perform field sobriety testing such as the walk-and-turn test, the horizontal gaze nystagmus test, and the one leg stand test shows that they must have had this consciousness of guilt. He retorted, " if they were innocent they would have nothing to hide."
I replied, "yes but you forget one thing, I have my clients refuse these roadside tests not for trial but for suppression of evidence purposes.