Probable cause

In New Jersey, N.J. Stat. § 39:4-50.4a directs the municipal court to determine by a preponderance of the evidence whether the arresting officer had probable cause to believe the person had been driving or was in actual physical control of a motor vehicle on the public highways or quasi-public areas of the State while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, a narcotic, hallucinogenic or habit-producing drug, or marijuana or a defined cannabis item.

New Jersey's statute, N.J. Stat. § 39:4-50.4a, also has the court determine whether the person was placed under arrest, if appropriate, and whether the person refused to submit to the test upon the officer's request. If these elements of the violation are not established, no conviction shall issue.

In Nebraska, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 60-498.02 provides that a person whose operator's license is subject to revocation under a related Nebraska section shall have all proceedings dismissed, or the license immediately reinstated without the reinstatement fee, once the director receives suitable evidence of a listed circumstance. Among them is a holding, in the criminal action on the charge arising from the same incident, that the peace officer did not have probable cause to believe the person was operating or in actual physical control of a motor vehicle in violation of a separate Nebraska section or a conforming city or village ordinance.

Nebraska's statute, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 60-498.02, also provides that if a charge is later filed or refiled, the director may reinstate the revocation, except a revocation dismissed under a separate Nebraska section.

In Arkansas, A.C.A. § 5-65-103 makes it unlawful for a person who is intoxicated to operate or be in actual physical control of a motorboat on the waters of the state or a motor vehicle. The statute also provides that the consumption of alcohol or the possession of an open container of alcohol aboard a motorboat "does not in and of itself constitute probable cause that the person committed the offense of boating while intoxicated."

In Michigan, MCL 257.625f provides that when a person who refused a chemical test requests a hearing, the secretary of state holds it, and the hearing covers only listed issues. Among them is "whether the peace officer had reasonable grounds to believe that the person had committed a crime" described in a separate section of the same statute.

Michigan's statute, MCL 257.625f, also lists whether the person was placed under arrest for such a crime, whether any refusal of the test upon the officer's request was reasonable, and whether the person was advised of rights described in another section.

Deadlines, limits and penalty ranges are set by each state’s statutes, so this page does not state them. Each state page shows them with the official source and the date they were verified — or says plainly that a figure has not been confirmed yet.