Law&Crime Sidebar - Judge Slams Cops for Botched 'Dude, I Blew Zero!' Teen DUI Arrest

Episode Date: April 24, 2025

When Tayvin Galanakis, then 19, was pulled over by police in Newton, Iowa in 2022 for leaving his high beams on, officers suspected he might be under the influence. Galanakis eventually did a breath test, which registered no alcohol in his system. Despite that, the officers arrested him anyway. Now a judge has ruled the city and officers cannot use qualified immunity as a defense in a civil case Galanakis filed against them. Law&Crime’s Jesse Weber breaks it all down with Chauncey Moudling, the chief prosecuting attorney and legal counsel for Jefferson County, Iowa.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW:Go to https://ThriveMarket.com/sidebar to receive 30% off your first order AND a FREE gift when you join Thrive Market today!HOST:Jesse Weber: https://twitter.com/jessecordweberLAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokeVideo Editing - Michael Deininger, Christina O'Shea & Jay CruzScript Writing & Producing - Savannah Williamson & Juliana BattagliaGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSocial Media Management - Vanessa BeinSTAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3yWhere To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletterRead Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2IqoLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law and Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wondry Plus in the Wondery app Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Agent Nate Russo returns in Oracle 3, Murder at the Grandview, the latest installment of the gripping Audible Original series. When a reunion at an abandoned island hotel turns deadly, Russo must untangle accident from murder. But beware, something sinister lurks in the grand. views shadows. Joshua Jackson

delivers a bone-chilling performance in this supernatural thriller that will keep you on the edge of your seat. Don't let your fears take hold of you as you dive into this addictive series. Love thrillers with a paranormal twist? The entire Oracle trilogy is available on Audible. Listen now on Audible.

Turn around for James Bond you back. Right now you're being placed underrest for operating well intoxicated, okay? I'm not intoxicated. I'm not intoxicated. I blew zero. Tavin Gallinacus, a college football player pulled over for using his high beams,

was handcuffed despite passing a breathalyzer test. That arrest was caught on body cam, and now a federal appeals court has delivered a scathing rebuke of the officers involved. I'm going to break down what the court said, why the case is moving forward, and what it all means for the future of police accountability. Welcome to Sidebar, presented by Law and Crime.

I'm Jesse Weber. The rain was fallen hard when Taven Gallinacchus drove through Newton with his high beams on one August night back in 2022, which should have been a simple traffic stop, ended up turning into a legal battle. By the way, a legal battle that just cleared its biggest hurdle yet, as a federal appeals court has now ruled that the then-19-year-old, currently 21, College football player Tavon Gallinaccus can now sue the police officers who arrested him, no longer immune to this civil suit. But they didn't just arrest him.

They took a blood alcohol reading from him. And despite the fact that it came back as zero, meaning no alcohol detected in his system, they arrested him anyway. Now, we're going to get into the latest court ruling. Again, a huge success for Gallinacchus, by the way. But first, I want to take you back to that incident in question. when a routine stop turned quite controversial. It was just after midnight on August 28th, 2022,

when Officer Nathan Winners pulled over Gallinacchus' vehicle after seeing him driving with his high beams. And the William Penn University wide receiver immediately explained he was using his bright lights because one headlight was out. And body cam footage that's been obtained by law and crime shows the officer's initial approach. Hi there. How you doing, sir? Good. How are you? Good. My name's Officer Winters with the Newton Police Department. Reason I pulled over is because you have your bright lights on. Yeah, but I have a headlight out

so I just keep my brights on. Okay, well that's not legal. Oh, is it? No. Yeah, when a car comes by, I turn them off, but like... Well, you didn't with me. Oh, you're close enough though. You're like, you're close enough? Yeah, you're a while back. It has to be within 500 feet. Oh, I'm sorry. And you're not supposed to have your brights on in the city limits. My fault, my You got your license registration insurance, right? Yeah, yeah, I got you. Now, this body cam video shows Gallinac is seemingly complying with the officer's request, handing over his insurance and registration.

But still, the officer asks him to step out of the vehicle. All right, that'll work. I'm going to have you hop out with me, okay? Cool. Car on or off. You could probably leave the car off. I bet. I'm going to roll the window over, please.

Do me a favor, put your gum on the, on your dash there. Oh my gun on my dad? Yeah. Perfect. The officer then proceeded to ask about guns and drugs. You don't have anything on you, no bombs, guns, drugs? No bombs or no drugs. Okay, let's go back here.

Which, you know, could say standard protocol operating procedure here. But he went even further, and he questioned him on whether he had anything to drink and pointed out what he saw as signs of alcohol consumption. How much have you had to drink tonight? None. What do you mean none? I've had nothing to drink, okay? Why would you, why would your eyes be watery and bloodshot?

Do you want to blow me real quick? I don't want to blow you. And even though you heard Gallinacchus there offer to take a breathalyzer test, the officer instead chose to go a different route, asking him to perform field sobriety tests. Now, we're going to play this for you and I want you to take a look at it. You can judge for yourself. Are there signs of impairment? Is he following instructions?

Is something else going on or is he completely in the clear? Come on, man, it's too easy. Let's do the breath now. You two for two. By the way, it took us a while to go through all this, especially the body cam, and we usually work through lunches, we work through dinners, we work through snacks, and I'll tell you what? I always try to eat clean, but shopping for healthy food is not easy. It's tough to know what's actually good for you. But that is why I'm so pumped. Thrive Market is now sponsoring

a sidebar. So Thrive Market is a go-to online grocery store for getting healthy essentials. And one of the things that I love is their shopping experience because as a Thrive Market member, you can customize the assortment of products in just a few clicks based on your preferences and your diet. You can filter the products to get exactly what you're looking for. Like instead of chopping on candy, I think these amazing organic avocado oil. chips that are perfect for that midday snack. Also, this company, super echo conscious. All their products are shipped from their zero waste warehouses. Everything is delivered straight to your door. You don't even have to leave the house. So if you're ready to make healthy food shopping

as easy as a few clicks, check out Thrive Market, scan the QR code on screen, click the link in the description, or head over to thrive market.com slash sidebar to get 30% off of your first order. And by the way, a free gift when you join Thrive Market today. Give me a little blah. I will. I will. I will here in a minute. Let's blow real quick.

Stop doing all these damn tests. Let's blow. Let's get to business. Off one. My guess, so how do I turn? Take a series of small steps. Stop walking 13 steps. Let me proper turn.

How many steps did I say to take? Like eight or nine? I said nine. Why did you take 14 and then 15? I thought you're going to tell me when to turn. I said to count your steps out loud. Keep your leg straight. Is that six inches to you?

Yep. How did I tell you count? One, Mississippi, two, Mississippi, three Mississippi. Not some good. Yes, we will. Why do you... Because you're showing some very strong signs of impairment. The series of tests included a walk and turn test, one leg test, and an eye tracking test.

And finally, the officer performs the breathalyzer. Now in this next clip, I want you to pay very close attention to the breathalyzer device and the reading that was captured on the body case. on the body cam video. All right, what I want you to do is make a tight seal around this and blow outwards like you're blowing up a balloon, okay? Ooh, all right. You ready?

Yep. Okay, you can relax. So I'm going to read the Miranda, okay? Right now you have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can, it will be used against you in a court of law. Yep, you saw it right there. Zeros. Straight zeros.

Okay? No alcohol detected in his blood, in his system. But instead of, you know, things just. just ending right there, the officer switches gears and begins asking about marijuana. When's last time we smoked weed? I do not remember that. Tonight? Who?

Okay, well, I would think it's tonight. I've had no weed tonight. Gas for 630 down on C. What, why do you think it's tonight? Why do you think I'm supposed to blow zero? So now you're trying to think I smoke weed. That's what's going on. You can't do that, man.

You really can't do that. Absolutely, I can. Is he allowed to do that? Yes, he is. So I blow zero. That's what we're on? I'm on drugs. That's ridiculous.

I would... During my field sobriety, it is indicative of impairment. So let's be honest. I'm being honest. You smoke some weed at your friend's house? No. You hit a pin? Nope.

Why is your field sobriety so poor? What? Why is your field sobriety so poor? And why are you so lethargic and slow-moving? And speaking with a slur-de- speech and your eyes are watery and your eyes are bloodshot you know they're watery break this room rain aren't very tense very tense right now so you have an officer believes okay there might be a different substance in his system it's getting pretty bad and

following this heated exchange mr galanacus was taken into custody for operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated despite the zero zero zero Turn around between the bunch of back. Right now you're being placed under rest for operating well intoxicated, okay? I'm not intoxicated. But here's what happens next, okay? So following his arrest, Gallinacchus was actually later cleared by somebody known as a drug recognition expert, meaning it was determined he was not in fact intoxicated.

And what does he do after he's released? turns around and sues. He sues the city of Newton, Iowa, along with the chief of police, the officer who arrested Gallinacchus, Nathan Winners, and another officer who was present there as well, Christopher Wing, claiming that his rights were violated, particularly because he was arrested without probable cause. That's the argument. And here's what happened next. After a lengthy legal battle and a lot of back and forth, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals

just handed Gallinacus a huge victory. And here's the thing. Not only did they deliver him a victory, they delivered a scathing rebuke of the officer's actions in a 12-page opinion. Okay, so we're going to get to that opinion in just a minute, but I want to first bring on a special guest to help me break all this down.

I'm joined by Chauncey Molding, chief prosecuting attorney and legal counsel for Jeffrey Jefferson County, Iowa. Thanks so much for coming on. It's good to see you. It's good to meet you. This is an upsetting case in the sense, you know, there's so many times that we cover cases where it's pretty clear from the body cam footage, someone's intoxicated, someone's impaired. This is such a unique situation because of the zero zero, right?

And it makes you wonder exactly what would be the justification for arresting him. What would be the legal defense to arresting him? How is this not a potential violation of his rights? What are your thoughts on it? Well, I'm not going to wager an opinion on whether it's a violation of his rights or not. I think that's the matter before the courts right now. But under Iowa law, it doesn't necessarily require intoxication by alcohol in order to prove a crime's been occurred or has occurred. The OWI statute is actually a statute that prohibits operating while impaired.

And you can be impaired by any type of substance or even no substance at all sometimes. And what that would, I believe, be the theory for the police on this case is that Mr. Gallinacchus was impaired by a substance other than alcohol. I think there's some flaws in that, specifically when they are talking in the officer's car, I think Officer Winters indicates, why do you smell like, alcohol. And so when they shift the investigation into a drug impairment investigation after the breathalyzer shows zeros, I think it kind of shows that there was a change in operating theory from the officer's standpoint during the course of the investigation. Obviously, if you blow zeros, you're not impaired by alcohol. There's a point during the course of the body cam when the officer was saying it looks like he's showing significant signs of impairment. And it made me think

about these field sobriety tests. I always wonder, even if you're not impaired, even if you're not, you have no substances in you, could you fail the test? You're nervous. You might get the instructions wrong. And I wonder how much weight should we be giving field sobriety tests? So when I try OWI cases, I always hope that you've got somebody who's doing field sobrieties that's just all over the place. Falling down, stumbling around, slurring their words. A lot of times, in order to get to the actual scientific, level of impairment, either through a data master breath test or a blood draw or a urine draw, you have to establish probable cause that the person's impaired. An officer can't just pull

somebody over and be like, hey, I need you to come down to the station and, you know, take a sample of your urine or breath for chemical analysis. Got to get to that level. And that's what the FSTs are for, the field sobrieties. They are calibrated and they are scientifically verified. there's a whole process that I think it's the National Institute for Highway Safety correlates in order to try and figure out, do these tests indicate somebody's impaired or not? And they're validated. But of course, you know, somebody who maybe has poor motor function control or epilepsy, things along those lines could certainly show indications of impairment without actually having consumed any substances. But in this case, I think one of the you know fatal flaws for it from the from the city side is watching those fsts um he's about as calm and cool and collected as somebody can be um doesn't put his foot down um he does i think he on one of the tests which is the walk and turn um it tests your motor functions and also uh test your ability to listen to instructions and follow instructions i think on that one

you know he just keeps taking steps taking steps taking steps uh until he thinks he's supposed to to be walking until he's told to turn around, takes 13 or 14 one way, 13 or 14 the other way back. He's not following instructions, but he's on the line. He's doing heel to toe. He's got very clear motor control. The guy, he's an athlete. I think he's pretty in control of his body during the whole procedure here. So you got a 19-year-old athlete who's showing, you know, some confidence and some arrogance. And then you've got an officer who also used to be a high school football player and they kind of talk about that a little bit and kind of bro down with each other. And then it turns of seems like maybe at some point egos got involved. And if I was

trying to look at this from an outside perspective, I think at some point it's possible. There is more emotion or ego than law in this case. Do you, are you concerned when a case like this becomes publicized and people see it and talk about it, that it could erode trust in law enforcement? Look, we don't have a perfect system. Nobody would say that, but it's the best one with God. And if anybody has any ideas on how to make it better, I'm always all ears. I think everybody is. So, you know, there's checks and balances here.

Mr. Gallinacchus, I don't know the details on the charging decision. He was released. I don't believe a criminal indictment was filed for OWI, and there'd be no evidence to file it. So in that case, I believe the prosecuting attorney was the check and balance in that. If that check hadn't been in effect, the court system is there. And now we have the civil check in this system to try and impose some, I don't know, accountability or to prevent such a thing in the future. So, you know, I hope it wouldn't erode trust because, frankly, the system doesn't always work,

but it seems to be working now. Let's talk about the law a little bit. I want to get into what the appeals court concluded in their opinion. So you have Judge Jane Kelly writing. Gallinacus' movements and behavior captured on Winner's body camera footage suggested the opposite of intoxication. As the district court found, and as the footage shows, Gallinacus was moving confidently and directing subtle and not so subtle verbal jabs at winners in a manner that would have been difficult for an impaired person. And the court basically rejected every justification that officers provided for arresting him, including that he hesitated when asked about smoking marijuana, the presence of air fresheners in the car, chewing gum. The opinion reads,

weighed against the totality of the circumstances, namely video of a lengthy stop in which Gallinacus registers almost no outward indication of intoxication, no objectively reasonable officer could conclude that these isolated actions amounted to arguable probable cause to arrest Gallinacchus. The opinion continues, Galanacus's traffic violation, the air fresheners, and his brief difficulty

finding documentation while simultaneously answering Winters questions, are minimally suggestive of impairment. And we showed you earlier that Gallinacus appeared to make some minor mistakes during those field sobriety tests, and while the officers seemingly saw those mistakes as pointing to probable cause, the judges disagreed. That Gallinacus did not completely follow winner's instructions

on two of the sobriety tests, taking too many steps and not turning or counting out loud in the ways instructed, also lends weak support for the inference that Gallinacus was intoxicated. So this is huge for him. This is huge, this ruling because it means that the lawsuit can proceed. Now, Chauncey, talk to us about, is it rare for a court to allow a suit like this to proceed?

Is it rare to give, I mean, they're holding no punches about their thoughts on that body cam. Right. Is it rare? So we do have qualified immunity as a principle that officers during the conduct of their job should be immune from civilized. liability for actions that are taken during the course of doing their job. That protection is qualified. It's not absolute. And it doesn't apply to constitutional violations, which is what Gallinacus is alleging here, a constitutional due process violation. Is it rare? It is rare because most of the time an officer is in good faith doing his job, he's going to be protected from personal liability

in the actions that he takes, right? If your lieutenant tells you to go boot a door and and go in and arrest somebody, well, if one thing or another led to that being the wrong decision, that officer is not personally liable for the cost of that door, for example. So is it rare? It's certainly, you know, not rare in the grand scheme of things. These cases happen all the time, but it's not common because most of police actions are protected by that qualified immunity statute.

So in other words, do you think that this would set some sort of legal precedent in any way? I certainly hope not. I always tell the guys we don't want to be making law and making precedent. We want to be following the law and following precedent. So I don't know what type of precedent this would set. But depending on how the case shakes out, I'm sure it's going to be on training materials in the state of Iowa in the future. What happens next? Can this be appealed to the Supreme Court? I mean, do you think it would be a case that was right for their consideration? It's obviously getting a lot of publicity. But do you think that this is a case that would go past you or where do you think it goes next? The Supreme Court seems pretty busy these days. What would give you that idea? It certainly could be appealed to it. I don't really, you know, want to read the tea leaves on whether they would accept the case or not.

But it seems like such a clear ruling on the part of the appeals court that I would imagine at this point, it would probably go to settlement discussions. I was going to ask you that. What do you think that would, what could that look like based on what you've seen in similar cases? One of my questions about all this, and I understand why Gallinacus sued, but what is the damage here? Right. So he was arrested. He was released after some period of time. I don't even think he spent the night there. Obviously, it's probably embarrassing. And it was a certainly, it's proven to be a infractious. on his civil liberties, he's entitled to some damage. I don't know what that damage would be though. And so obviously it's in federal court. He's claiming more than, you know, the statutory minimums there. So I believe that's still $75,000.

But I don't know what the plaintiff in this case thinks that he suffered, which would explain what he would ask for in this settlement. Trauma of being arrested, having this body cam published, having it be, you know, everybody talking about this story? In one sense, it might have heard his reputation. I'm just, I'm coming up with potential arguments. I think Alan Axis looks pretty calm, cool, and collected in this video. I would say it's probably done more for him than against him. Interesting. Listen, I think it's a really fascinating case. It's, you know, unfortunate if the allegations are true about this. But Chauncey Molding, I appreciate you coming on and giving

your perspective. And I would love to have you back on to talk about other cases. All right. Take care. That's all we have for you right now here on Sidebar, everybody. Thank you so much for joining us. And as always, please subscribe on YouTube, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, wherever you should get your podcasts. I'm Jesse Weber. I'll speak to you next time. app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify.