It should be know that in many jurisdictions (at least within the US) the officer's belief that you're impaired is usually enough for arrest - regardless of the

It should be know that in many jurisdictions (at least within the US) the officer's belief that you're impaired is usually enough for arrest - regardless of the outcome of any field sobriety tests or machine results. On one hand I understand this approach due to the dizzying array of factors that cause impaired driving - from alcohol to prescription drugs to designer drugs that may not have definitive tests available. Seeing as sleep deprived drivers often perform as poorly as impaired drivers on various tests that should be included as well. On the other, this is still a situation where an officer's opinion with no supporting evidence (or conflicting evidence) can lead to arrest. Sure, you may "win" in front of a judge eventually but this is after you get handcuffed, spend the night in jail, have an arrest on your record, etc. Not to mention having your mugshot posted online by various unscrupulous sites running an extortion racket (demanding payment to remove). You'll soon discover that to many people simply being arrested = guilty. In my case my "win" came 14 months later when the judge watched the dashcam footage, saw that my driving, speech, behavior, etc clearly wasn't impaired and threw the case out. Total time in court was less than 20 minutes. Interestingly we watched the dash cam footage after the officer testified. At one point my attorney asked why the officer thought I was impaired. He responded with "I'm Irish Catholic and I know what drunk people look like". The entire courtroom (myself included) laughed.