In what situation might an officer choose not to administer SFSTs?

The choice that allows an officer to determine when not to administer SFSTs hinges on various practical and safety concerns. In situations where a subject shows clear signs of severe impairment, conducting standardized field sobriety tests may not be necessary or advisable. For example, if the individual is exhibiting obvious signs of intoxication, such as slurred speech, staggering, or the inability to maintain balance, the officer may already have sufficient grounds to make an arrest without the need for further testing.

In such cases, the results of SFSTs may not provide any additional evidence or insight into the subject's level of impairment, as the indicators are already quite evident. Additionally, it could be an extenuating circumstance where the individual's safety—or the safety of others—could be compromised if they were to undergo the tests. Thus, choosing not to administer SFSTs in the presence of severe impairment aligns with the principles of effective law enforcement and prudent decision-making. This approach enables officers to prioritize immediate actions that address public safety concerns rather than engaging in a testing process that could delay necessary interventions.