One of the basic rules of prosecution is that you need some evidence in order to convict. Unfortunately there are times when because of the client’s record, the State decides to take a shot. It is arguable whether this is correct, but having been a young prosecutor once, I know the pressure you feel when it is a recidivist, and the reluctance to just let it go. So today we tried a case just about devoid of any inculpatory evidence. My client has an accident and his prescription bottle of pills is found. No evidence he took any. He was coming from a methadone clinic, but said he had not taken any methadone (as the judge pointed out he may have worked there). He broke the windshield with his head and the police officer and the EMS people forced him to go to the hospital. No SFSTSs because……. he was too injured to take them according to the trooper. Now the medical records from the hospital……no hospital records, not a page. What was he on (if anything) and was it enough to impair him? Who knows. The case against my client was tossed out a few moments after the 3rd State’s witness uttered his last breath on the witness stand and the State rested. I explained to my client why this prosecutor had to try the case and he understood. It was a waste of the court’s time and forced another trial into the afternoon, but sometimes even when you have a slam dunk, you don’t get a dismissal.