What I Look for When Reviewing SFSTs

When I review standardized field sobriety tests, I do not begin by counting clues in the police report. I begin with the video.

The report tells me what the officer concluded. The video helps me evaluate how the tests were actually administered and what the driver actually did.

I look at the entire encounter—not just the few minutes during which the tests were performed. That includes the driving behavior, initial contact, conversation with the driver, decision to request testing, testing environment, instructions, demonstrations, and the officer’s final interpretation.

Some of the questions I consider include:

• Were the instructions clearly explained?
• Did the officer properly demonstrate the tests?
• Did the driver appear to understand what was being asked?
• Were the surface, lighting, traffic, weather, or footwear relevant?
• Were injuries or medical limitations discussed?
• Does the report accurately describe what is visible on video?
• Did the officer document favorable performance as well as claimed mistakes?
• Were the tests administered and interpreted in a standardized manner?

No single issue automatically decides a case. A sloped roadway does not necessarily make every test meaningless, just as one alleged clue does not independently prove impairment.

The goal is to examine the investigation fairly and in context.

I spent years administering these tests and later teaching officers how to perform them. That experience helps me distinguish between an insignificant variation and an issue that may genuinely affect the reliability or interpretation of the testing.

Ultimately, the question is not simply whether an officer listed enough clues in a report. The question is whether the officer’s conclusions are supported by the complete investigation and the evidence actually captured on video.