After being charged with two DUIs last year (2007), Lindsay Lohan spent two months in rehabilitation and was required to perform community service as part of her plea bargain agreement.  The 21-year old actress was sentenced to four days in jail, but as part of a plea bargain agreement, her jail time was reduced in exchange for 10 days of community service.  Ms. Lohan must fulfill part of her community service by working two, four-hour shifts at a Los Angeles County Morgue and two days working in a hospital emergency room.  The reasoning behind this requirement is to show Ms. Lohan that there are real-life consequences to drunk driving.

As this shows, nice people can get arrested too.

Visit our website for more information about how we defend Miami DUI cases.  www.duilawdefense.com

While DUI/DWI is a very serious problem and not a laughing matter, I did find this amusing video on YouTube: 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNPxIibhcKY&feature=related

In a new law that takes effect on July 1, 2008, the Florida Legislature has reduced the potential penalties for certain third or subsequent driving with suspended, canceled or revoked license (DWLS) violations. The new law applies if the underlying suspension was for certain reasons, including: failing to pay traffic penalties, failure to pay child support, failing to maintain mandatory auto insurance, and having been designated as a habitual traffic offender (HTO – three violations within 5 years). The Legislature has apparently determined that many persons with multiple DWLS violations do not deserve to be classified as felons. Read on for more details.

Under prior law, a first DWLS violation was classified as a second degree misdemeanor (punishable by up to 60 days in jail); a second DWLS violation was a first degree misdemeanor (up to one year in jail); and a third or subsequent DWLS violation was a third degree felony (up to five years prison).

The new law lists certain types of suspensions, cancelations or revocations (failure to pay traffic fines, maintain insurance, etc.). A first DWLS violation involving one of the suspensions on the list is classified as a second degree misdemeanor; and a second or subsequent such violation is a first degree misdemeanor. Hence, the new law eliminates the third degree felony classification for a third or subsequent DWLS violation involving one of the listed types of license suspensions, cancelations or revocations.

The newly created first degree misdemeanor penalty will only be available to those drivers who do not have a prior forcible felony conviction.

The following is the list of qualifying suspensions, cancelations or revocations under the new law: (1) failing to pay child support as provided in s. 322.245 or s. 61.13016; (2) failing to pay any other financial obligation as provided in s. 322.245 other than those specified in s. 322.245(1); (3) failing to comply with a civil penalty required in s. 318.15 (paying traffic tickets and fees); (4) failing to maintain vehicular financial responsibility as required by chapter 324; (5) failing to comply with attendance or other requirements for minors as set forth in s. 322.091; or (6) having been designated as a habitual traffic offender under s. 322.264(1)(d) (DWLS three times in five years).

For more information, please visit our website at www.duilawdefense.com.

Jeffrey Burke was sentenced to 15 consecutive weekends in jail following a charge of driving under the influence in Montgomery County Pennsylvania. He was riding a bicycle at the time of his arrest.

Burke had attended a fireworks display on July 4th, 2007 in Narbeth, PA. As he cycled away from the festivities, he was involved in an accident with a car. Police responding to the scene determined that Burke had a blood alcohol level twice the legal limit for intoxication, and he was booked for drunk driving in Pennsylvania.

In handing down the sentence, the Montgomery County judge may have been influenced by the fact that Burke skipped his court hearing, thinking there was no offense of DUI while bicycling.

Of course in Florida, DUI on a bicycle has long been held a valid crime, see State v. Howard, 510 So.2d 612, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1540 (Fla.App. 3 Dist. Jun 23, 1987).

For more information, please visit our website at www.duilawdefense.com.

Fort Worth, TX.  AP, July 8 -  A man accused of delivering baskets of drug-laced cookies to as many as a dozen police departments, causing several officers to become sick, was arrested Tuesday.

Christian V. Phillips, 18, of Watauga, was arrested Tuesday morning after allegedly taking cookies to the Lake Worth police station, where officers had been tipped off that someone was falsely claiming to deliver treats on behalf of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, said Lake Worth Police Chief Brett McGuire.

“Our officers took a good whiff and thought they smelled like marijuana,” McGuire said, adding that preliminary tests instead detected traces of LSD…

BUT WAIT!!! THERES MORE……..

Tainted” Cop Cookies Deemed Safe

Lake Worth, TX.  AP, July 11 -  A teenager jailed on accusations that he delivered drug-laced cookies to a dozen police stations was released Thursday after tests showed no drugs in goodies taken to two departments.

Blue Mound and Lake Worth police said tests by the Tarrant County medical examiner showed there were no controlled substances in cookies delivered this week by Christian V. Phillips, 18, who had been jailed in Lake Worth on $75,000 bond on a charge of tampering with a consumer product.

Phillips walked quickly out of the jail without commenting while accompanied by his father, who then drove away with his son.

Phillips’ attorney said his client was performing community-service work when he delivered goodies for Mothers Against Drunk Driving to about a dozen stations in the past couple of weeks. Only two stations had any treats left over to be tested for drugs.

“I’m really upset that this thing has gotten to this point, that this kid has gotten convicted in the media before any evidence was collected,” said the attorney, L. Patrick Davis.

visit our website www.duilawdefense.com

Joseph Errichiello of Port Richey, Florida was pulled over recently at a DUI checkpoint and was charged with drunk driving after failing field sobriety testing.  Mr. Errichiello does not drink alcohol and willingly submitted to roadside tests.  After failing the tests due to physical and mental disabilities, he willingly submitted to both a breath test and urinalysis.  He blew 0.00% according to the breath test and the urinalysis came back negative.

Despite these results, the Florida Highway Patrol placed Mr. Errichiello under arrest for DUI and the prosecutor moved forward with the case.

Less than two weeks later, Mr. Errichiello was stopped again by a Pasco County Sheriff and charged with DUI.  Once again, he proved to be sober after testing.  Mr. Errichiello says that both times the police asked him if he had been drinking and he told them, “No.”  Apparently, he has had a learning disability since he was a child. Mr. Errichiello also stated in an interview with the Pasco Times that he had a severe diabetic condition which contributed to his failing the field sobriety testing.  After the second arrest, the prosecuting attorney did move to dismiss the DUI charges against Mr. Errichiello.

As a Miami DUI Lawyer, it does not surprise me that the police requested that Mr. Errichiello submit to the breath test and the urinalysis after his failing the field sobriety testing.  I am surprised that the prosecuting attorney would want to move forward with its case after the breath test and urine results showed no levels of alcohol or controlled substances.

I know how easily the police can “mistake” the failing of roadside exercises for intoxication. There are thousands of people just like Mr. Errichiello who are unable to pass field sobriety testing because of physical and mental conditions. It is important that individuals arrested for DUI consult with an experienced DUI defense attorney as quickly as possible after their arrest so that such things can be uncovered.

Visit my Website at www.duilawdefense.com

MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving), though I don’t know anyone who is in favor of drunk driving has proposed mandatory placement of ignition interlock devices on new vehicles in the U.S.

Toyota, GM and Saab already have these devices near completion for installation at the factories:

Tokyo- Japanese auto giant Toyota Motor Corp. will develop a system to stop a vehicle if it detects the driver is drunk as part of efforts to cope with a serious social problem, a report said on Wednesday.

The system, expected to become available in 2009, analyzes sweat on the palms of the driver’s hands to assess blood alcohol content and would then not allow the vehicle to be started if the reading was above safety limits, the Asahi Shimbun said. The system would also analyze the driver’s eye movement, driving performance and other factors, the Asahi said.

European automakers have developed systems that require the driver to blow into a tube attached to a vehicle to detect alcohol in the breath. Toyota opted not to use that system as it may fail if the driver asks another person to blow into the tube, the Asahi said.

Toyota rival Nissan Motor said last year it was planning similar steps.

From CBS News:

You have a few drinks, climb behind the wheel of your car, turn the key and — nothing. The engine doesn’t turn over, the car doesn’t move.

If Mothers Against Drunk Driving has its way, a device that checks a driver’s alcohol levels will be mandatory in cars owned by anyone ever convicted of drunk driving, and, eventually, every automobile.

New Mexico already has such a law.

MADD, backed by a national association of state highway officials and car manufacturers, is announcing a campaign to change drunken driving laws in the other 49 states to require such devices for first-time offenders.

“We’ll focus on that problem of separating the drunk driver from the vehicle,” MADD president Glynn Birch told CBS Radio News.

For more information visit our website at www.duilawdefense.com

 

Did you ever wonder how breathalyzers work? There is a website which will give you a pretty fair idea.

There are many different kinds of “breathalyzers” or breath testing devices. The first of the modern breath testers, manufactured by Smith and Wesson many years ago was called the Breathalyzer.

When I was a young prosecutor we used to call the Smith and Wesson 900A the “Dial-a-Drunk” because the machine’s dial was able to be manipulated by the operator.

Since then, various manufacturers have recognized the growing market and come out with their own models, bearing such names as Intoxilyzer, Intoximeter, DataMaster, AlcoSensor, Alcotest and so on; most of these products have been produced in different model versions, such as the Intoxilyer 4011, 5000 and 8000.

To deal with the confusion, the term “breathalyzer” came to be used as a generic term for any breath testing instrument.

Most of these are evidentiary machines — that is, larger machines generally kept at the police station whose test results are used in evidence. Others are smaller, handheld units carried by officers in the field; generally called PBTs (preliminary breath tests) or PAS (preliminary alcohol screedning). These are less accurate and are usually used as a field sobriety test to help determine whether to arrest a suspect.

The original Breathalyzer operated using a wet chemical method of analysis, employing a disposable glass ampoule of chemicals. Although still occasionally found in law enforcement, this relatively primitive technology was replaced in later machines by infrared spectroscopy, gas chromatography or, mainly in handheld units, fuel cell analysis; a couple of the more recent machines use a combination of infrared and fuel cell.

Here is a great website explaining how these different types of machines work:

http://science.howstuffworks.com/breathalyzer.htm

For more information visit our website at www.duilawdefense.com

DUI Case Was Dropped, But Driver Wants to Sue

Bradenton, FL - July 3, 2008  -  If there is a lucky four-digit lottery number in DUI cases, it is this: a 0.000 on the blood-alcohol breath test.

Gary Shuchat hit quadruple zeros, but that was not enough to win his freedom after a traffic stop in May.

A Manatee County sheriff’s deputy said Shuchat failed field sobriety tests, even though Shuchat showed no obvious signs of impairment. He was not slurring words. His eyes were fine.

There was no odor of alcohol.Authorities got a urine sample from Shuchat, which came back clean a few weeks ago. No drugs. No alcohol. A state prosecutor dropped the case…
Shuchat, 54, an executive at a lumber company in Canada, will not let his arrest slide as a mere inconvenience or a story to tell about American police. He wants to sue the Sheriff’s Office, calling his arrest in Bradenton a terrifying experience…

“This was the most degrading and dehumanizing thing I have ever been through,” Shuchat said. “This was crazy. I was not drunk.”

Last year, out of the 1,008 breath tests given by Manatee deputies, 23 people had results of 0.000.

DUI cases are inherently problematic because each driver is different. Some faces are naturally red. Some speech is naturally slurred.

A bigger person may have a harder time doing field-sobriety tests, such as walking a straight line, than a person who is slender.

In the legal defense community, field sobriety tests are dubbed “abnormal” exercises used to test “normal” abilities.

Authorities who are challenged in lawsuits routinely say that police act in good faith, that a stop and a detention were performed within the scope of the officer’s duties.

Deputies ask drivers about any physical problems that may prevent them from completing field-sobriety exercises. Shuchat weighs more than 250 pounds and is 6 feet, 1 inch tall.

He said he did not have any physical or medical ailments.

If a person is arrested after field-sobriety tests, deputies are not going to free the person based on 0.000 on the breath test, Capt. William Dixon of the Manatee County Sheriff’s Office said. The driver is detained, and presumed impaired, before the breath test is given.

Deputies have discretion in using a portable breath test in cases in which the deputy thinks the person may be impaired, but not enough to support a criminal DUI case. The driver will not be arrested. The results are not allowed in court. The portable breath test is meant to compel the person to find another way home.

It was not immediately known why Deputy Lee Harrington did not use a portable breath test on Shuchat. Whether Harrington had one that night, or could not get one, has not been determined.

Dixon said it was in Harrington’s discretion to arrest Shuchat on suspicion of DUI.

Another deputy, Michael Lesselroth, said Shuchat was weaving in a lane in the 2300 block of 53rd Avenue West at about 11 p.m. the night he was arrested.

“How do you weave in a lane? I’ve never heard of that before,” Shuchat said in an interview.

Lesselroth said he swerved in his patrol car to avoid a collision with Shuchat, who was driving a rented Dodge Durango. Shuchat, the deputy said, “swayed” in the driver’s seat of his car.

The deputy called Harrington to conduct a DUI examination.

Shuchat said he had a glass of wine during dinner at a Sarasota steakhouse, a statement that Harrington reported in his write-up.

Harrington asked Shuchat to walk on a piece of tape, heel to toe. Shuchat had trouble with his balance and stepped off the line, according to a report.

Shuchat was told to use his eyes to follow a light in front of him. Deputies said he moved his head to track the light.

Shuchat was arrested. At a sheriff’s station, he breath came came up 0.000. Harrington thought it was a mistake, Shuchat recalled, and told him to blow harder.

“I’m blowing my brains out,” Shuchat said. Shuchat again blew 0.000.

Shuchat told Harrington to free him.

But the deputy said he could not leave. Shuchat was ordered to give urine for analysis.

Authorities say a person who is under the influence of a drug and who has not been drinking will register 0.000 on the breath test.

Shuchat spent several hours in jail before he posted $500 bail. A prosecutor last month said there was insufficient evidence against Shuchat.

“Charlie Chan used to say, ‘Never hunt rabbit with a dead dog,’” Lipinski said. “That’s what they are doing here: a DUI case with triple zeros and clean urine.”

From time to time I will post interesting issues relating to D.U.I. Defense and Criminal Justice.