Anyone dealt with a motion to suppress because officer did not have probable cause to believe driver was intoxicated. Judge suppressed - we're appealing. Situation - police officer stops speeding vehicle (77 in 70), smells alcohol but did not state he observed other indications of intoxication. Defense relied primarily on Domingo, 82 SW3d 617 holding that smell of alcohol alone is insufficient in PI arrest.

"P.I." shoud probably be renamed "P.U." because of the usual rancid smell of the case under scrutiny... I'm guessing that was the reason for the reversal in the Lubbock case. You should be able to easily distinguish the two, since being so highly intoxicated as to be a danger to yourself or others is a much greater burden of proof than that required for DWI, i.e., even the slightest diminution of physical or mental faculties. Is not the smell of alcohol alone at least reasonable suspicion to continue the stop and investigation until your officer could develop p.c. to arrest for D.W.I.?