Driver in Frederick Knew his Rights, Police Did Not Appear to Understand Maryland DUI Laws (Opinion)

Imagine this situation. It’s 9:40 PM. You’re driving home, you’re tired. Suddenly a police officer pulls out behind you and turns on his lights. At first you don’t even realize it’s you being pulled over, after all you weren’t aware you were doing anything wrong. Finally, after about 15 to 20 seconds, you realize you’re the one being pulled over. So you calmly pull over in a car dealership parking lot, for the safety of you and the officer. The officer informs you that you ran a red light, which naturally results in confusion because you had no idea. You’re tired and nervous, and to make things worse apparently you left your drivers license at home.

The officer views your nervousness as signs of being under the influence, and despite no other visible signs of being under the influence, doubles down that you are under the influence because you are dressed nicely. You refuse field sobriety tests because, contrary to what the police officers claim, Maryland drivers’ license only requires breath or blood test, and field sobriety tests (FSTs) are subjective to an officer’s analysis and prone to officer error (some might argue intentionally). Most legal experts agree there is no benefit to agreeing to a FST as it will only be used as evidence against you. You’re aware of your rights. You exercise them. And because of it, you are placed under arrest and taken to the local police station, where you blow a 0.00 for blood-alcohol content, as well as are interviewed by a State Police drug recognition expert who could not determine any substance use. You are then released, with no way of getting yourself home because your car is still impounded. It’s 11:00 at night, and you need to somehow find a way home.

This is the exact situation Levi Trumbull found himself in, as outlined in a previous report analyzing body camera footage of a March 29, 2025, traffic stop in Frederick County. A review of the official police report reveals inconsistencies between the deputy’s written observations and what is visible on the video. Trumbull appears nervous but coherent and physically steady, with no indication of bloodshot eyes or other visible signs of impairment, as claimed in the report.

According to the Frederick County Sheriff’s Office (FCSO) report, Deputy First Class Roush observed Trumbull’s vehicle roll through a red light at Route 355 and Lowes Lane around 9:40 p.m. The deputy initiated a traffic stop, stating that the driver continued for a quarter mile before pulling into the well-lit lot of a used car dealership. Since the speed limit in that section of Route 355 is 40 MPH, this means approximately 15 to 20 seconds elapsed while Trumbull travelled that quarter mile – certainly not an excessive amount of time to find a safe place to pull over. The report describes this as passing “several driveways” and making a “jerking” turn, suggesting possible impairment. However, the body footage shows Trumbull made a cautious decision to stop in a location that was both safe and visible—actions consistent with public safety guidance for drivers during nighttime stops. In fact, reviewing the camera footage shows that from the direction Trumbull was travelling, the roadway was not well lit at all, further justifying his decision to pull into a well lit car dealership safely off the road.

The report further claims Trumbull exhibited bloodshot eyes, was clenching his jaw, and was repeatedly scanning left and right without cause. But the body camera footage does not support the presence of bloodshot eyes consistent with being under the influence (although the red light from the police cruiser could easily create that illusion), and Trumbull’s responses, though anxious, remain clear and deliberate. He declines to perform field sobriety tests but complies with other instructions and does not attempt to flee or obstruct the stop.

After arresting Trumbull on suspicion of driving under the influence, officers administered a breathalyzer test at the station, which returned a 0.00% blood alcohol level. A Drug Recognition Expert was later called but did not reach any conclusion regarding impairment before Trumbull invoked his Miranda rights. Trumbull was cited for traffic violations and released, with his vehicle still impounded and no way to get home on his own.

The discrepancy between the deputy’s narrative and the footage, particularly concerning the alleged signs of impairment, raises questions about whether the arrest was justified. However, the officer arresting Trumbull for refusing field sobriety testing was certainly not justified, and contrary to Maryland law, in my opinion.

The conversation between Trumbull and the FCSO deputies highlights the officer’s justification for arresting Trumbull, and his threat to take Trumbull to jail if he refused the Field Sobriety Tests. Note that despite claiming “speech patterns” speaking with Trumbull, no note of unusual speech patterns is in the incident report (attached at the end of this article).

FCSO Deputy: “I’m going to have you step out and field sobriety real quick make sure you’re sober good to drive”

Trumbull: “Well I’m not going to perform field sobriety but I will step out of the vehicle I don’t have a problem with that.”

FCSO Deputy: “Why won’t you perform field sobriety?”

Trumbull: “Why would I? Why would I give you probable cause to take me in do you think I’m a DUI?”

FCSO Deputy: “I already have have probable cause to take you in.”

Trumbull: “What is your probable cause to think that I’m under the influence of alcohol right now?”

FCSO Deputy: “Driving behavior, speech patterns.”

Trumbull: “What about my speech patterns?”

FCSO Deputy: “It’s not something I’m going to get into right now. Do you want to perform field sobriety or no?”

Trumbull: “Well no why would I give you that?”

FCSO Deputy: “Because I’m going to take you to jail.”

Trumbull: “Go right ahead.”

…

Trumbull after being handcuffed and escorted to cruiser: “Am I required by law to perform a field sobriety exercise, I didn’t believe that I was?”

FCSO Deputy: “Implied consent, it’s on the bottom of your Maryland driver’s license.”

…

FCSO Deputy later in the conversation: “Your refusal of the test gives me probable cause.”

The fact that the FCSO deputy stated his probable cause was the refusal of the test is quite concerning, when coupled with the officer telling Trumbull that he was required to take a FST. Refusal of a field sobriety test is no different than exercising your right to remain silent. You are under no obligation to assist a police officer in their investigation. If you refuse the FST, the officer must make their assessment based upon other factors and indicators. Refusal of the test can be part of the assessment for probable cause, but refusal of the test alone is not sufficient. Trumbull did not struggle or stumble when opening his car door, he did not have slurred speech, he did not have bloodshot eyes visible in the body camera footage. When I watch the body camera footage, I see a nervous, tired young man visibly confused why he was pulled over, because he has no idea that he ran a red light.

It’s also important to note, that if the deputy already had probable cause to arrest Trumbull, then once again there was no benefit to Trumbull consenting to FST exercises, as they would only be used against him.

Now, there is a silver lining in all of this. After receiving information from FCSO for our Public Information Act request, and reviewing the footage a second time I do not believe this is willful misconduct on behalf of the deputies in question, nor was it targeted against Trumbull due to his reporting as a journalist. In the past 12 months, FCSO has had only one complaint of false arrest, and two complaints of excessive force – neither of which were against Deputy First Class Roush or any of the other deputies involved. This is, in fact, likely a matter of lack of proper training on the law, and what is required from a Maryland driver with regards to field sobriety tests. I do not fault the deputies in question for this, and blame for lack of adequate training lays solely with Frederick County Sheriff’s Office. Clearly, Frederick County Sheriff’s Office needs to better train their deputies on the meaning of implied consent testing, which clearly states in Maryland law:

§ 16-205.1. (a) (1) (iv) “Test” means, unless the context requires otherwise:

                        1.      A test of a person’s breath or of 1 specimen of a person’s blood to determine alcohol concentration;

                        2.      A test or tests of 1 specimen of a person’s blood to determine the drug or controlled dangerous substance content of the person’s blood; or

                        3.      Both:

                        A.      A test of a person’s breath or a test of 1 specimen of a person’s blood, to determine alcohol concentration; and

                        B.      A test or tests of 1 specimen of a person’s blood to determine the drug or controlled dangerous substance content of the person’s blood.

At this point, it becomes clear that FCSO believed they were in the right by arresting Trumbull, on the grounds that he refused testing (even though he is not required to consent to FSTs by law). I’d like to encourage FCSO to implement better training measures with their employees, so that future incidents such as this one can be avoided.

With that said, it also goes without saying that Mr. Trumbull should have better exercised his right to remain silent. His attempts to discuss the traffic stop with the officers, as well as justify why he was unable to locate his driver’s license, likely increased the officer’s suspicion that Trumbull may have been under the influence. However, being over-talkative and nervous is certainly not a crime.

It’s also important to note here, we reached out to Frederick County Sheriff’s Office with request for comment along side our Public Information Act request. No comment was provided by FCSO. This of course is not an admission of guilt, but if we would hold FCSO to the same standard they held Trumbull to, then their refusal to provide comment would be taken as probable cause to launch a criminal investigation of the department for being under the influence while reading their emails. Obviously, not providing a comment on a matter which may end up in a civil rights lawsuit is probably the correct course of action on FCSO’s part, but that highlights how insanely low the bar was for establishing probable cause against Trumbull, who being well aware of his rights, knows that there is no legal benefit to consenting to subjective FSTs.

I of course do not make any of these statements because I am anti-police or other such nonsense. Far from it. I believe we need to invest more into our police officers, including providing better training. This incident reinforces that statement, as better training on Maryland implied consent laws would likely have avoided Trumbull being arrested, and simply issued a citation for failing to obey the red light or provide his driver’s license. He could have then been on his way.

I applaud the deputies in question with efforts to keep Maryland drivers safe, and hope that FCSO will provide the adequate training needed to ensure that drivers knowledgeable of their rights are not improperly arrested or detained due to a misunderstanding on behalf of the officers.

Opinion article by Ken Buckler, President of RFHC. All opinions are his own and do not reflect those of our clients or sponsors.

Based upon information from a Frederick County Sheriff’s Office police report and previously released body-worn camera footage.

---