Search
Subscribe To Rss
Categories
Office 305.670.1800
Mobile 305.321.3237
Toll Free 1.888.DRUNK 07
jonathanatblecherlaw.com EMAIL NOW
The latest in DUI Defense READ MORE
Mar
22

Nightmare on DUI Street

by admin

By: Mark Eiglarsh

You’re driving home after enjoying a spectacular evening with friends on Miami Beach. While nearing your home, a police officer activates his overhead lights and pulls you over. After ordering you out of the vehicle, he requests that you perform some “Field Sobriety Tests.” After complying with his requests, your world as you know it changes as he suddenly places handcuffs tightly on your wrists and informs you that you’re under arrest for Driving Under The Influence (DUI). As you’re sitting in a tiny jail cell overflowing with some of the most vile, dangerous, and impaired inmates, you wonder how this could have happened. You’re certain that you consumed no more than a couple of drinks.

Unfortunately, this hypothetical nightmare has become too many people’s reality. It begins with an officer who may have been “fishing for DUI’s.” “Fishing” is the term used by cops who admit that they will frequently follow vehicles leaving bars and/or restaurants in order to “catch” drunk drivers. The law now permits them to follow a vehicle indefinitely in order detect the most minor infractions. The problem is that when a fisherman casts out his big net in order to seize tuna, invariably they wind up catching some innocent dolphin.

Almost always, officers claim that they observed the driver to have the “strong odor of alcohol,” and “bloodshot watery eyes.” When firmly questioned, officers will admit that “strong” simply means that they were able to detect the smell on the defendant, not that they consumed a large quantity. Furthermore, it’s difficult to find anyone, sober or not, who doesn’t have some degree of bloodshot and/or watery eyes during evening hours.

The primary problem with the roadside tests is that the area on which the suspect performs the tests was selected simply by wherever the driver happens to stop. That surface, which is curved to allow for proper water drainage, often contains debris, cracks and uneven areas. The officer’s lights, passing motorists, and less then ideal weather conditions may also affect the results. There are those who because of factors like age, weight, lack of coordination and prior injuries, could never pass the tests even if they were sober.

Even those in good physical shape may learn that they “failed” the “finger to nose test,” for instance, even though they touched their finger to their nose 6 out of 6 times. Officers will allege that the defendant failed to follow instructions because they used the “pad” of their finger instead of the “tip.” Also, officers will often allege that a defendant “stepped off the line several times,” even though the “line” on the road was an imaginary one.

Many defendants who are deemed to have “refused” to blow into the machine, simply requested to consult with an attorney prior to blowing. Since officers are not required to permit contact with a lawyer at that point, arrestees lose their driving privileges for a year if they persist in their request and don’t blow.

For those that do blow, the breath reading may be affected by a number of factors other then the consumption of alcohol. For example, if a suspect burps and/or regurgitates prior to blowing into the machine, he may bring up “mouth alcohol,” which could result in an artificially high reading. The reading could also be affected by other factors, such as wearing dentures, using an asthma inhaler, or suffering from diabetes.

Hopefully, you are never pulled over and investigated for drunk driving. The best way to avoid that scenario is by never getting impaired and driving. Unfortunately, each day there are individuals who, for reasons other then alcohol and/or drug consumption, are arrested for DUI by officers. Those unlucky few are forced to endure a living nightmare.

FacebookBlogger PostLinkedInMySpaceHotmailGoogle BookmarksShare
Mar
8

DRUGGED DUI

by admin

DUI. Most people think about someone who drives after drinking alcohol. The same is true for the term DWI or driving while intoxicated. These terms also refer to driving under the influence of either prescription or illegal drugs. In fact, they can and do refer to a driver who is impaired by prescription or illegal drugs, as well as alcohol. The person who drives a motor vehicle after using psychoactive drugs is an issue of ongoing concern to law enforcement officers, forensic toxicologists, attorneys, physicians, therapists and traffic safety professionals all across United States. recent focus is on documenting and assessing drug related impairment displayed by the driver, ways to identify the drug impaired driver on the road, the availability of appropriate chemical tests and the interpretation of the results of urine or blood tests.

Legally prescribed medications can impair a driver. Prescription medication impairment can be as dangerous as alcohol impairment. The primary concern in regard to drugged driving is the effect that medication or drugs will have on a driver. Driving under the influence of any drug that acts on your brain can impair your reaction time, motor skills and judgment. Driving under the influence of drugs is a public health concern because it puts the driver at risk, but also your passengers and others who share the road.

Most illegal drugs and many prescription medications act on your brain and can alter your coordination, cognition, attention deficit, balance, reaction time, perception which are needed for safely operate a motor vehicle. The effects of different drugs differ depending on the history of the user, of course. The quantity consumed and external factors play a role, as well.

Many people think that a DUI can only be prosecuted when and officer believes that you have consumed alcohol or illegal drugs in excess of the legal limits. Any substance, even prescription medication and many inhalant, which can impair safe operation of a motor vehicle, can result in an DUI arrest.

FacebookBlogger PostLinkedInMySpaceHotmailGoogle BookmarksShare
Aug
15

Driving Under the Influence of…Bread

by admin

Phil Price, a nationally known DUI attorney in Montgomery, Alabama, conducted an interesting series of tests a few years ago on one of the most commonly used breath testing machines. Without consuming any alcoholic beverages, he submitted himself to repeated breath testing — after eating various types of food.

His findings were startling.

After consuming almost any type of bread product — white loaf bread, donuts, pretzels, pastries, etc. — Price consistently registered blood-alcohol readings on the machine. These levels were commonly around .03%, but rose as high as .05% (enough, along with a drink or two, to reach illegal levels). Further, the Intoxilyzer’s slope detector (an electrical circuit designed to detect alcohol from the mouth rather than from the lungs) failed to indicate the presence of any “mouth alcohol”. He reported this in an article entitled “Intoxilyzer: A Bread Testing Device?”, 15(4)Drinking/Driving Law Letter 52.

Reacting to the use of this article by defense attorneys in their state, the Washington State Toxicology Laboratory conducted their own studies to refute the findings — this time with the machine used in Washington, a DataMaster. Unfortunately, their research only confimed Price’s experience.

As reported in Logan and Distefano, “Ethanol Content of Various Foods and Soft Drinks and their Potential for Interference with a Breath-Alcohol Test”, 22 Journal of Analytical Toxicology 18 (1998), a variety of breads and soft drinks were tested and found to contain no alcohol. Alcohol-free subjects then ingested these products and provided breath samples into a DataMaster. The law enforcement researchers’ conclusions:

We found that, particularly at low concentrations but as high as 0.046g/210L, mouth alcohol rather than expiratory breath alcohol may be reported as apparent true breath alcohol…

In other words, alcohol-free subjects who consumed bread or soft drinks were causing the machines to read up to .05% blood alcohol concentrations (readings are rounded off to closest 1/100th percentile). Furthermore, the slope detection system failed to screen the effects of mouth alcohol from that of alcohol coming from the lungs:

It is evident from these results that the slope detector feature was unable to distinguish mouth-alcohol concentrations at these very low levels.

What caused bread to register on breath machines as alcohol? The theory of the state lab’s experts:

Most baked products with listed contents indicating they contained yeast did in fact have some alcohol present. Alcohol is produced by the fermentation process in yeasts by their action on simple sugars used in preparing the dough….Although most of the alcohol in the dough is lost during the baking process, some is evidently retained in the matrix of the bread…

Parenthetically, there exists additional scientific literature reporting intoxication in animals eating dough and sourdough. Suter, “Presumed Ethanol Intoxication in Sheep Dogs Fed Uncooked Pizza Dough”, 69(1) Australian Veterinary Journal 20 (1990); Thrall, et al., “Ethanol Toxicosis Secondary to Sourdough Ingestion in a Dog”, 184(12) Journal of American Veterinary Medical Association 1513 (1984).

The effects of bread on breathalyzers is not just an interesting anecdote. The significance of these findings should be apparent. First, bread dough tends to stick between the teeth and remain there for extended periods of time, later to be breathed into a breathalyzer; it also absorbs alcohol while between the teeth. Second, although it is not illegal to drive with a .04% blood alcohol level,adding one or two drinks to the bread reading could raise that above the illegal .08% level.

FacebookBlogger PostLinkedInMySpaceHotmailGoogle BookmarksShare
Oct
5

Jonathan Blecher, P.A. Serves the Miami-Dade County Area

by admin

Cities in Miami-Dade County that we Serve:

Aventura
Bal Harbour
Bay Harbor Islands
Biscayne Park
Coral Gables
Cutler Bay
Doral
El Portal
Florida City
Golden Beach
Hialeah
Hialeah Gardens
Homestead
Indian Creek
Key Biscayne
Medley
Miami
Miami Beach
Miami Gardens
Miami Lakes
Miami Shores Village
Miami Springs
North Bay Village
North Miami
North Miami Beach
Opa-locka
Palmetto Bay
Pinecrest
South Miami
Sunny Isles Beach
Surfside
Sweetwater
Virginia Gardens
West Miami

…And all of Miami-Dade County

FacebookBlogger PostLinkedInMySpaceHotmailGoogle BookmarksShare
Aug
9

DUILawDefense.com Blog Celebrates One Year Anniversary

by admin

Our blog has reached its one year anniversary. We have posted quite a few interesting news items about DUI and related issues.

Blog Ranking: Top 2.3 %

Technorati is a popular blog directory service. It measures the popularity of a given blog as compared to all other sites that have been submitted to its system.

This blog currently has a Technorati rank of 1,612,160, which puts it in the top 2.3% of blogs tracked by Technorati.

FacebookBlogger PostLinkedInMySpaceHotmailGoogle BookmarksShare
Jun
23

You want to SuperSize that Breath Test, Sir?

by admin

By Kim Smith
ARIZONA DAILY STAR
Tucson, Arizona | Published: 06.14.2009
Drunken drivers with the late-night munchies soon could get more than just a burger and fries at the drive-through window.
The Pima County Sheriff’s Department’s new anti-drunken driving campaign — called Operation Would U Like Fries, or Operation WULF — hopes to put undercover deputies inside 24-hour fast-food restaurants to spot impaired drivers placing their orders, said Sgt. Doug Hanna, DUI unit supervisor.
If deputies notice someone with any of the classic symptoms of impairment — slurred speech, red or watery eyes, beer breath — they will radio a uniformed deputy stationed just outside, Hanna said.
The second deputy will then pull over the driver and, if field tests confirm what the officer at the drive-through suspected, arrest him or her for driving under the influence.
“The idea is to get them before they get back on the road,” Hanna said.
Bankrolling the intermittent program will be a $128,000 grant the Sheriff’s Department received from the Governor’s Office of Highway Safety for fiscal year 2008-2009, Hanna said. The grant also funds sobriety checkpoints and other anti-drunken driving programs.
Hanna said several local franchise owners and managers are interested in participating in the program, but are waiting for corporate approval. Once they get it, Hanna anticipates Operation WULF would take place every quarter or so.
Tucsonan Carlos Sanchez said he thinks the idea makes a lot of sense, since it’s a popular belief that people under the influence of drugs and alcohol often get hungry while partying.
“It’s just another way to get drunk drivers off the street,” Sanchez said.
Pamela Andrews, another local resident, has mixed feelings.
“I think it’s a good idea, but then again, isn’t it entrapment?” Andrews said. “I’d say do it anyway, though. I’d rather know the kids are safe out there — the ones who aren’t drinking, but are behind the wheel.”
Local defense attorneys and at least two local restaurateurs, were appalled at the idea.
“I have no love for drunk drivers, and I want them off the road, but this is too much like Big Brother,” said Tom O’Connor, owner of Tucson’s 21 Eegee’s.
Watching for impaired drivers from a parking lot is one thing; “fishing” for them from inside a business is another, O’Connor said.
Mike Herndon, who owns seven local Burger Kings, also was opposed.
Defense attorneys Joseph St. Louis, Michael Bloom and Brick Storts all questioned the allocation of resources in these economic times and the legality of such a program.
For example, alcohol on the breath doesn’t mean someone is impaired, Storts said.
St. Louis said law enforcement agencies spend a lot of money training officers to spot impaired drivers — and now those officers will be stuck behind a drive-through window.
“I’ve been practicing law 21 years, and I’ve done in excess of 200 DUI cases, and I can think of one that occurred at a fast-food restaurant,” St. Louis said.
But he did see one upside: “I can’t wait to challenge the first one in court.”
Bloom isn’t sure undercover deputies will have enough time to develop the “probable cause” needed to pull over drivers.
“The deputies will claim the program will deter drinking and driving, but once the word is out, all they are going to do is deter drunk drivers from going through the drive-through. … Project WULF is not going to reduce people’s blood alcohol levels, but it might reduce their cholesterol levels.”
Critics of the program have their own ideas for addressing the problem of drunken driving. Storts suggested more roadblocks. St. Louis advocates dashboard cameras that would provide evidence against impaired drivers while also protecting deputies from allegations of excessive force and other inappropriate behavior.
Local resident Debbie Ammons said she’d rather see grant money used to fund the school resource officer program, which has experienced cutbacks lately.
DUI unit supervisor Hanna said Operation WULF is just another tool for law enforcement agencies to use in battling drunken driving. The more deputies out in the community — whether they are at checkpoints, on the roads, in liquor-serving establishments or at drive-through windows — the more likely the message will get out.
“Hopefully, people will start getting the message, ‘Don’t drive impaired,’ ” he said.
The Royal Canadian Mounted Police were the first ones to come up with the drive-through concept, Hanna said. He learned about their program, Operation WULF, while attending a MADD conference in Dallas.
The sergeant pointed out that former University of Arizona quarterback Willie Tuitama was cited for extreme DUI after McDonald’s employees alerted a Tucson police officer that they suspected he was impaired, Hanna said. Tuitama was placed on 12 months of unsupervised probation last week after pleading guilty to misdemeanor DUI.
“Lots of time we get information from people working the drive-through,” Hanna said. “They’ll say, ‘I wish you’d been here five minutes ago because we had someone who was really smashed just come through.’ “
FacebookBlogger PostLinkedInMySpaceHotmailGoogle BookmarksShare
Jul
12

Florida Motorist Arrested Twice for DUI While Sober

by admin

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

FacebookBlogger PostLinkedInMySpaceHotmailGoogle BookmarksShare