He's by the car when the officers get there, right? Up to a year in jail and or $4,000 fine. We are going to do probable cause. You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can or will be used against you. You have the right to have an attorney present. If you cannot afford one, one will be appointed to you. On March 26th, 2025, Abraham Elias Solless was charged with driving while intoxicated and evading arrest after a dramatic crash on G Freeway in Harris County, Texas. Texas Penal Code section 49.0. 04 states, "A person commits an offense if the person is intoxicated while operating a motor vehicle in a public place." The case filled with twists and a 4-mile foot chase raises questions about whether the police had enough evidence to pin Solless down. Honor March 26, 2025, officers on patrol on Greewood in County, Texas. The officer observed a motor vehicle disabled in the left hand with grass B dividing southbound northbound lanes to traffic. Motor vehicle had multiple airbags deployed and all four tires appear to be damaged. On arrival, the officer observed additional motor vehicle disabled on the open access roadway. Um what was formerly a car dealership. Uh the officer observed the witness walking towards the officer trying to get off attention. The witness said the 5 minutes prior to the officer rival the defendant approached the witness. After the witness tal informed the officer that the defendant demanded to use the witness's phone, the witness advised the officer the defendant wanted to contact the defendant's mother to pick up defendant from the scene. The witness told the officer that the defendant continued to approach aggressively and that the witness told the defendant uh the witness called police and defendant did not stop. Witness said flood the scene on foot. The described clothing and the officer observed the individual matching the description running and approaching the scene of the incident. As the defender approached the scene of the accident, defendant began walking in a parking lot adjacent to the freeway. Officer gave loud verbal commands for stopped. Defendant fled on foot on the grass along a ditch. event slid down a dish and living across the creek then find the fence detached by residence um and fled on foot for approximately point4 miles before he was later detained by his police department turned over to deputy uh the scene was moved to a shell station to continue the investigation the officers contacted the defendant the officers a strong order of alcoholic beverage from the defendant and the officer is going to have red glossy eyes, slurred speech, dry mouth, competing phrases, and agitated demeanor. Um, you say a shaky demeanor. Sorry, agitated demeanor. Governor and the defendant denied drinking alcohol and initially denied drug use. um and then stated that he had been off for a couple days and had consumed a paste or coke. Uh the officer through training experience numbers to be received cocaine. Uh the defendant admitted that he was going to a girl's house um occurred and agreed to perform standy tests. Uh those administered and the officer 606 exposes on the HGN. The officer did not administer the walk stand due to drinking his feet while fleeing consent to a breast sample which was not completed due to interference being detected. He also obtained blood and there was a blood draw. Okay, your honor may come. What is he? I might have missed something, but besides the state saying that my client said he was going to someone's house, I didn't hear any operation facts. I mean, he he admits driving. He's by the car when the officers get there, right? Is he by the car when the officers get there? Where is he? I mean, from what I have, he is has fled the scene when the officers get there. and then comes back to the scene. Okay. Um the witness does the witness put him operating at all? Yeah, I just want to know. Yeah. All I heard is going somewhere. It doesn't say he was driving anywhere. I'm not sure if there was anything additional. Do you have anything else? Uh your your honor does look like he the witness stated that he stopped and exit exit his vehicle and observe the driver of the refu that's what I have but so doesn't match up my bon Martinez stated once he stopped and exited the vehicle he observed the driver of the raf 4 identified as Abraham Elias Salis using driver's license come out from the grass near the raft 4 and aggressively approach him requesting to use his cell phone. Um stated that he was trying to use his cell phone to call his mother to come pick him up and that Solace um said that Raph War belonged to his mother. Martinez stated after a short time that Solace asked Martinez if he had papers of immigration. Uh boom judge even with these facts it doesn't show driving even if he owned the car. We have no idea when there's no facts to say that he was driving the car that he admitted to driving the car. I don't see operation still. So Solace stated that he was driving the Rav 4 because he was going to a female's house and continued to speak. Solace then stated that he ended up in the grass because he was scared and then stated that he was a Mexican driver that swerved in front of him. A Mexican driver swerved in front of him. Is that what he said? allegedly told him, "Not take propelis or a paper." Solos said that other driver was in a gray Toyota telling him to go away. um stated that the RA 4 and the alleged Toyota came into contact causing a collision. Solace stated that he was coming from his house at Friendswood um but denied having anything to drink. Um, yeah. I mean, I think he was operating the vehicle at the time as and you have the other person say something, right? They say that it was that they identified him as the driver. They just never say they saw him driving or operating the vehicle. So, I believe that they they believe based on the circumstance that he was driving. I don't know if the witness actually saw him driving, but we have to prove the driving facts that he used on fire. Um, two or three week prior to his arrest, he admits that he was driving the vehicle at the time of the accident was found that the scene an accident was found nearby was observed coming out of the grass nearby. Although it's an admission judge who needs to be an admission plus, I don't see that being enough for the plus. Mr. Sal, I'm going to find that there's no probable cause in your case. Every freaking day in our county, someone dies from an alcoholrelated collision. Don't become a statistic because of a boneheaded move that you make where you kill some. Do you understand? Now, I'm going to find no probable cause. It's very possible they go indict this case at a later time with if they get more evidence, but don't kill anyone. Do you understand? Are there any conditions you're imposing on the baiting case? No, I'm going to find out. The judge's decision to dismiss all charges against Abraham Elias Solless showcases the judiciary's vital role in shielding citizens from overzealous policing, prioritizing justice over assumptions. Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, Section 2.01 01 declares, "It shall be the primary duty of all prosecuting attorneys, including any special prosecutors, not to convict, but to see that justice is done." Officers arrived at a wrecked vehicle with deployed airbags. But Solless had fled, only returning after a four-mile chase through ditches and private property. A witness described Solless aggressively demanding their phone to call his mother. Yet, no one directly saw him driving the vehicle. Solless admitted to heading to a female's house and mentioned a collision caused by another driver, but officers leaned on signs of intoxication, red eyes, slurred speech, and a shaky demeanor without linking them to the time of the crash. His prior drug use admission and failed sobriety tests weren't enough, and the evading arrest charge collapsed without proof of intent to flee lawful detention. Finding no probable cause, the judge rejected both charges, exposing the police's weak, circumstantial case and protecting Solless from unjust punishment, proving that solid evidence, not mere suspicion, is the backbone of justice. Like and subscribe for more police cam stories. Watch the next recommended video. Click to watch now.