A man from Sheboygan was recently accused of intoxicated driving on his birthday. According to police, they pulled him over after he left a bar on a recent Wednesday. Sadly, it was the man's birthday and -- even worse -- it's the fifth time he's been charged with OWI in Wisconsin.

Police allege that they tracked down the man after a bartender at the bar where he was celebrating tipped them off. The bartender told authorities that a woman had asked for help, and then she left the bar with the intoxicated man in his vehicle. After police pulled them over, they performed a sobriety test on the man and decided he was too drunk to operate his vehicle.

They arrested him and charged him with OWI, in addition to four misdemeanor counts of battery. They also charged him with operating a vehicle with a revoked license and disorderly conduct. The man turned 53 years of age on the day of the incident.

Defending yourself against a crime often involves a mix of simple, common-sense approaches combined with rock-solid criminal defense experience on the part of your defense attorney. For now, let's focus on the common-sense aspect of the drunk driving defense process by looking at the most important thing everyone knows about criminal defense in the United States: An accused person will remain innocent of the alleged crimes until -- and only if -- the prosecution proves that he or she is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

On a very "common sense" level, the notion of 'innocent until proven guilty' puts the burden of proof on the prosecution during your litigation process. If the prosecutions can't definitively and clearly prove that you were driving drunk, there's a good chance you'll receive a verdict of not guilty. And what does the prosecution need to prove you committed the crime? Irrefutable facts and evidence. This is why it's essential for those who have been wrongly accused of drunk driving to target the evidence in their defense process.

Evidence that might not be accurate for example is the result of your Breathalyzer test. It's well-known, for example, that a Breathalyzer test -- especially one used by police in the field -- may not yield accurate results, particularly if it's poorly calibrated, poorly maintained or not used properly. Also, police could fail to follow the required procedure while administering a Breathalyzer test, which would potentially render the results inaccurate and inadmissible in court. In addition to casting doubt on the accuracy of Breathalyzer test evidence, defendants might also seek to cast doubt on eyewitness testimony, the results of a field sobriety test, police accounts of the events before and during the arrest and other important facts.

Implied consent laws require all drivers to submit to chemical testing when police accuse them of driving while intoxicated. Of course, they still have the right to refuse such tests. However, as a result of implied consent laws, the driver will likely be immediately arrested on suspicion of DUI.

Implied consent laws function by assuming that when a driver gets a driver's license and enjoys the privilege of driving, they automatically consent to being tested for drugs or alcohol when police suspect them of driving while intoxicated. Such chemical tests could include urine, blood and breath tests.

When a driver refuses to take a chemical test, they will usually endure a mandatory driver's license suspension that could last up to a year. Interestingly, it's common for the license revocation to be longer after a driver refuses a test than if they take the test and fails. In some cases, a driver could even face harsher punishments if convicted of DUI after refusing to take a test.

Police arrest countless individuals on drunk driving charges every evening. However, police and the protocol they use to identify and charge people with intoxicated vehicle operation are not fool-proof. It's very possible for law enforcement officials to make a mistake and arrest someone intoxicated driving, when the accused was completely and undoubtedly sober. For this reason, every person accused of drunk driving will have the right to defend him or herself against the charges – no matter the facts and circumstances surrounding the arrest.

There will be numerous legal strategies available to defendants as they navigate their criminal charges. Such strategies may include:

1. Challenge evidence presented by the prosecution

If a police officer pulls you over or suspects you've been driving while intoxicated by alcohol, the officer will request that you take a Breathalyzer test as a part of a larger drunk driving investigation that also includes a field sobriety test. The officer will ask you to do the Breathalyzer test by telling you to blow into a tube. A machine will then analyze the alcohol content of your breath to estimate your state of intoxication.

Breathalyzer tests are known to be plagued by inaccuracies, however, and many drivers don't trust them. This prompts a lot of people to refuse a Breathalyzer test out of the fear that false or inaccurate evidence from the test could later be used against them in court. Fortunately, there are several situations in which a driver can legally refuse to submit to a Breathalyzer test.

If the officer has yet to establish any kind of drunk driving evidence against you, and the officer is merely asking you to perform a Breathalyzer test as a way of fishing for evidence, you may have the legal right to refuse the test in some cases. However, in other cases, refusing a breath test can result in serious criminal consequences and even the suspension of your drivers' license.