I have had several traffic cases that when I lay the foundation for the police car video, the defense attorney objects to the audio and the judge sustains the objection. The defendant does not testify and I have not had any success arguing Rule 801 or 803. I am unable to find Case Law on point. Does anyone have any suggestions?

Objects on what ground? Hearsay?

One objection was Prejudice outweighs Probative value and the other objects to an interview without access to counsel and both allows the video but suppress the audio.

Neither of those are cognizable objections. Of COURSE the entry of the audio is prejudicial. THAT'S WHY IT'S PROBATIVE! But look at what the actual rule (403) excludes: "if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of *unfair* prejudice." Evidence which establishes the guilt of the defendant isn't unfair.

The other objection is even further afield. A defendant does not have a right to an attorney until either: critical stages of prosecution have taken place (which can't happen on the side of the road) OR there's a custodial interrogation. If the person isn't in custody, there's no right to an attorney. A normal traffic stop doesn't create custody until the person is actually arrested. Detention? Yes. Custody? No. Also, the right to counsel must specifically be invoked. If they didn't invoke it on the tape then there's no grounds for them to object to it later. That's obviously just a tumbnail sketch, but without BOTH elements of custody AND interrogation then there's no right to an attorney. John Stride and John Rolater's "Confessions" by TDCAA is invaluable on these points.

Is this in front of a JP? Please tell me it's a JP.

Along those lines, look at Casey, 215 S.W.3d 870, for a good explanation of how courts should apply the Rule 403 balancing test.

Brody is absolutely right about the defendant's statements on the side of the road.

Go here (on DWI Resource page), for all the law that matters, and from the sound of it in the court you find yourself, the law may not matter.

http://www.tdcaa.com/dwi/case_law/video.html