But in Utah, I believe, you can refuse a field sobriety test, but not a breathalyzer. Well, you can, but it's an automatic suspension of your license and I think some jail time.
In Idaho you can refuse the breathalyzer, but then you automatically have to go to the hospital for a blood test. So you're buggered either way, really.
I think this is pretty standard. The slim advantage to refusing the field test is that the officer has to make a judgment call on whether to bring you in and do a lot of paperwork on you, just to have you pass the breathalyzer.
Apparently, the best way to avoid a DUI (other than not driving impaired, that is) is to keep your registration and proof of insurance clipped to your visor. When you get pulled over, slide your window down just an inch and hand out the documentation through the crack. You do not have to respond to a word the officer says. This helps you from indicating that you are impaired, either by your actions or smell. Even if the things the officer says sounds like orders, you do not have to do them due to the right against self-incrimination. If you are confident, refuse the field sobriety test. This basically gives the officer the least amount of evidence to go on when they are deciding whether to take you in or not.
Or so I was told by a friend who is a policeman in Washington.
Edit: He also said that after he was trained, he was extremely surprised that he had never received a DUI. All it takes to get pulled over is the slightest infraction, like driving on the white line on the on-ramp. Apparently a field sobriety test is pretty conclusive. The
nystagmus (eye movement) test is really the only thing you need, no matter the person's tolerance levels.