When Massachusetts police suspect a driver of operating under the influence, one of the first steps they take is asking for field sobriety tests. These roadside exercises are intended to measure balance, coordination, and focus; however, in reality, they are often unreliable, subjective, and administered under stressful conditions.
For many people arrested for OUI, field sobriety tests become the centerpiece of the state’s case. Understanding how these tests work, their limits, and your rights if you refuse them is critical.
At Riccio Law, Attorney Anthony Riccio brings both prosecutor experience and defense insight to cases where field sobriety tests play a role. He knows how officers are trained to present them in court and how to expose the weaknesses that can decide the outcome of your case.
If you were asked to perform field sobriety tests and now face OUI charges, contact Riccio Law today. Early defense can make all the difference.
Police in Massachusetts often use a set of physical and coordination tests at the roadside when they suspect a driver is under the influence. These are commonly referred to as field sobriety tests.
The three standardized tests recognized by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) are:
In addition to these, Massachusetts officers sometimes use non-standard tests such as reciting the alphabet, touching the nose with eyes closed, or counting backwards. The NHTSA does not validate these, and it is more open to challenge in court.
Field sobriety tests are just one piece of evidence in the broader framework of DUI defense cases, and their weight in court depends heavily on how they were administered and challenged.
Field sobriety tests are often presented as scientific, but studies show their accuracy is limited. Even under ideal conditions, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) found:
These percentages leave a wide margin for error. In real life, roadside tests are conducted on uneven pavement, in adverse weather conditions, or under the stress of flashing lights and heavy traffic. Health conditions, fatigue, age, or footwear can also affect performance.
Due to these issues, field sobriety tests are best understood as tools for police investigation, rather than proof of guilt. A skilled Massachusetts OUI lawyer can use these weaknesses to question their reliability in court.
Massachusetts courts have limited the use of field sobriety tests as evidence in criminal proceedings. Two critical cases shape the law today:
These rulings mean prosecutors must rely heavily on the officer’s observations rather than test results alone. When combined with the strict penalties under DUI/OUI laws, the reliability of every piece of evidence becomes crucial.
In Massachusetts, you are not legally required to perform field sobriety tests. Unlike refusing a breathalyzer, there is no automatic license suspension for simply declining to take one.
A refusal cannot be mentioned at trial, so the jury will never be aware of it. That protection makes refusal very different from chemical test refusals, which do carry penalties.
Police may still choose to arrest you without test results, but the case is often weaker when the only evidence is observations like speech, balance, or odor.
Knowing this distinction is crucial; many drivers mistakenly believe they will be penalized solely for refusing to take the test. In reality, refusing may prevent flawed test results from being included in the state’s case.
Police often present field sobriety tests as objective proof of impairment. In reality, these tests are subjective and open to challenge. Attorney Anthony Riccio uses his background as a former prosecutor to identify weaknesses such as:
Challenging these tests can mean excluding them entirely or showing the jury why they cannot be trusted. This strategy often shifts the balance in OUI defense.
Attorney Anthony Riccio’s background as a former prosecutor provides insight into how the Commonwealth prepares OUI cases and how to dismantle them in court.
His recognition in Super Lawyers 2025 underscores his record of results and reputation among peers in criminal defense.
Clients also benefit from his local courtroom experience in Quincy and across the South Shore, where understanding procedure and practice often makes the difference.
At Riccio Law, clients receive direct communication, honest assessments, and defense strategies tailored to their specific circumstances, rather than a one-size-fits-all approach.
Yes. Prior OUI history from another state can still be used against you in Massachusetts.
Absolutely. Video can reveal poor instructions, unfair conditions, or inconsistencies between the officer’s report and what actually happened.
Documented health issues like vertigo, back problems, or neurological conditions can be robust evidence undermining the reliability of test results.
They may try, but unapproved tests, such as alphabet recitation, carry little evidentiary weight and can often be excluded from trial.
Usually, yes. Officers often start with these exercises to justify an arrest before requesting a chemical test at the station.
Field sobriety tests often become the centerpiece of an OUI arrest, but they are far from decisive. With the proper defense, their weaknesses can be exposed and their impact reduced.
At Riccio Law, Attorney Anthony Riccio gives clients direct attention and clear next steps from the very first call.
If field sobriety tests led to your arrest, act now. Contact Riccio Law today for a confidential consultation and start protecting your license, record, and future.
