Taimoor Rana is seasoned criminal defense attorney specializing in DUI related cases. He shares his expert legal opinion here What to Expect During a DUI or DWI Stop »
0
- A night out, a few drinks, a ride home and being stopped over by a policeman, sounds familiar? It is common for many to have a few drinks and drive, not feeling impaired, and be stopped over by police.
But is it justified to be stopped? First of all, you should understand that a police officer should have a justifiable reason to stop your vehicle. It is not possible for him to pull you over for no apparent reason. Speeding, aggressive driving, failing to use traffic signals and rolling through a stop sign are all obvious traffic infractions that give the police officer reason to stop your car. However, even if you have not broken any obvious traffic laws, a police officer can usually still find an excuse to pull you over.
You might also like
|
|
|
|
|
Police Officer Must Take Care in Taking Breath Test to Avoid Driver’s License Suspension overturned »
During the investigation, the officer takes the breath test of the driver who is charged for the DUI case. The officer conducts the breath test of the driver, when the driver submits the test there are certain rules that officer must follow. When the driver is accused due to alcohol reason in Florida, the Department of Highway Safety and Vehicles directly suspends the driver’s license.
Any how the driver has the right to defense for DMV license suspension by a formal hearing in which the lawyer raises voice favoring the driver on the legal points like the stop of the driver was legal, the reason to arrest the driver was correct and that the breath test was valid. These are the points on which the lawyer speaks on behalf of the driver.
You might also like
|
|
|
|
|
Study Suggests Gender Specific DUI Road Tests »
Although there have been many jokes about women trying to flirt with police officers to get out of tickets but now, there maybe some concrete evidence to prove that woman are more at a loss when it comes to the standard DUI laws than ever before.
The Law Offices of Lawrence Taylor, a DUI attorney in Los Angeles area and nationally known author of the book Drunk Driving Defense, has provided an article, which shows a study conducted in Italy.
According to the study, there is a component in the female’s bio-chemical make-up which could make women more prone to fail a DUI road test. The study may prove that woman may be unfairly arrested for DUI in some cases and should be given more gender specific tests.
You might also like
|
|
|
|
|
A list of Strange American Laws »
Alabama
- In jasper, it is illegal for a husband to beat his wife with a stick larger in diameter than his thumb.
- It is illegal to play Dominos on Sunday.
- It is illegal top wear a duke moustache that causes laughter in church.
- Putting salt on a railroad track may be punishable by death.
Alaska
- In Fairbanks, it is illegal to feed alcoholic beverages to a moose.
- While it is legal to shoot bears, waking sleeping bear for the purpose of taking a photograph is prohibited.
Arizona
- In Tucson, it is illegal for women to wear pants.
- In Globe, it is illegal to play cards in the street with a Native American.
- In Glendale, it is illegal to drive a car in reverse.
- In Nogales, it is illegal to wear suspenders.
Arkansas
- A man can legally beat his wife, but not more than once a month.
- In Fayetteville, it is illegal to kill “any living creature”.
- Schoolteachers who bob their hair may forfeit their pay raises.
- Flirtation between men and women on the streets of Little Rock may result in a 30-Day jail term.
California
- In Los Angeles, a man may legally beat his wife with a leather strap, as long as it is less than two inches wide, or she gives him permission to use a wider strap.
- It is a misdemeanor to shoot at any kind of game from a moving vehicle, unless the target is a whale.
- In Pacific Groove, “molesting” butterflies can result in a $500 fine.
- In Pasadena, it is illegal for a secretary to be alone in a room with her boss.
- It is illegal to set a mousetrap without a hunting license.
- In Long Beach, it is illegal to curse on a mini-golf course.
- In San Francisco, it is illegal to wipe one’s car with used underwear.
- It is illegal to cry on the witness stand in Los Angeles courts.
You might also like
|
|
|
|
|
Cheektowaga Man faces Felony DWI Charge »
It has been reported by the state police that a motorist who has been seen driving over the centerline in Cheektowaga early this morning arrested on a charge of felony while intoxicated.
According to police, troopers Robert Ellis and John Smolarek were traveling east on Aero Drive shortly before 3 a.m., when it has been seen by then that the vehicle in front of them cross the centerline.
You might also like
|
|
|
|
|
How the Prosecution Prove the BAC Level? »
By the drunk driving laws to drive a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol (DUI) or while having a blood-alcohol concentration (BAC) of .08% or higher has been made a criminal offense. However, to be under the influence or to have a BAC of .08% while taking a breath test in a police station an hour or two AFTER driving is not a criminal offense. So how it is proved by the prosecution that what was the BAC when the defendant was driving? Now that’s a problem.
In a DUI case by projecting backwards, using average alcohol absorption and elimination rates you can try to guess what the BAC was, but that is only a very inaccurate guess. This process of guessing is called “retrograde extrapolation” which is a fancy name for trying to guess backwards. Now here the problem is that everyone has a different metabolism, and even in a given person alcohol will metabolize at different rates that depends on many variables.
You might also like
|
|
|
|
|
“The Death Penalty for DUI” Is it Justified? »
Yes, here I am talking about the death penalty. In a drunk driving case. Here in United States. For murder…… No, that is not for an involuntary manslaughter. Not for vehicular homicide. Murder. And that is a first-degree murder. Likewise someone has pointed a gun at someone and pulled the trigger. MADD has achieved so much success in their political pressure campaigns that they’ve actually gotten some courts and legislatures to create a new type of crime which is referred to as “DUI murder”.
Just hold on for a minute, you say. I thought if you want to kill a person then you had to intend to kill him or her. You have to "premeditate" and such kinds of other things, right? Well, yes and no. Of course, each state is a little different, but most od the states follow similar laws. And by those laws generally a homicide ("the killing of another human being") has been broken into different categories. The first one is excusable homicide that is such a homicide where, due to the self-defense or other justification, the death is not considered as a crime. Next one is "manslaughter" — basically, which is considered as a killing but that is not murder. Usually there are two kinds of manslaughter: voluntary and involuntary.
Voluntary manslaughter is sometimes referred to as a killing in the "heat of passion"; means that you lacked the time or ability to reflect on the act.
You might also like
|
|
|
|
|
Breathalyzers: Why Aren’t They Warranted to Measure Alcohol? »
If you are facing drunk driving charges, then you must have taken (unless that you refuse) a chemical test for checking a blood alcohol concentration (BAC). It has been noted that the test will be done with a breath machine in the great majority of cases. When you face the trial in a court then you will come to know that you have been charged with not just one, but with two crimes.
First Charge:
The first crime with which you have been charged is the so-called "per se" offense: driving while having a BAC of .08% or greater. It doesn’t matter and no one actually cares whether you were intoxicated or not. It would be proved by all of the evidence that without question you were sober: your condition is not the crime, instead of that the crime is your chemical composition. And what is the sole source of evidence used by the police officers upon which you will be either convicted or acquitted? Just a machine.
Second Charge:
The second charge that you have to face is "driving under the influence of alcohol" ("DUI"), or in some states, it is referred to as "driving while intoxicated" ("DWI") or "operating under the influence" ("OUI"). All of them are basically the same thing. However in each case, it can be proved by the prosecution that you were under the influence of alcohol by offering the results of the same breath test into evidence and the jury will be instructed that it should be refutably believed that the defendant is guilty unless he can prove otherwise.
You might also like
|
|
|
|
|
What Happened to the Presumption of Innocence? »
This happens in most countries of the world, an illegal charges by the State forces the accused to prove himself innocent. However, in America, the presumption of innocence has always been a fundamental part of our rights as a free people.
This basic protection that has been given against the power of the government has been recognized as flowing from the 5th, 6th and 14th Amendments to our Constitution. As said by the United States Supreme Court, “The principle that there is a presumption of innocence in favor of the accused is the undoubted law, axiomatic and elementary, and its enforcement lies at the foundation of the administration of our criminal law.” Coffin v. U.S., 156 U.S. 432 (1895).
So what has happened to this presumption of innocence in a case of drunk driving? Can we consider this as another example of “the DUI exception to the Constitution”? So let us take a look at how this fundamental right has been slowly eroded by our DUI laws….
So now Let us assume that you have been arrested for drunk driving, and a reading of .09% blood-alcohol concentration (BAC) is shown by breathalyzers. By the breathalyzer you will be charged probably with two crimes:
You might also like
|
|
|
|
|
“Strong Odor of Alcohol on Suspect’s Breath” Is it possible? »
I am sure about the fact that you would have never seen a DUI case where the officer does not report an odor of alcohol on the suspect’s breath. Never ever.It is expected by the officer that the person who has been stopped by him must have drunk and so there must be an odor of alcohol on his breath, and it is a psychological fact that we see, hear and smell the same thing that we expect to see, hear and smell.
But here I really want to tell you that it is a fact that most police DUI reports are formatted for the usual symptoms. There is given a box for "odor of alcohol", which the officer is required to check off. Usually there are three boxes, that has labels "strong", "moderate" and "weak"; but there is no box for "none", so this means that there is no other option for the officer other than to check off one of the three boxes. Mostly the "strong" box is checked by the officers. It is presumed that the stronger the odor of alcohol, the more intoxicated would have been the person who has been arrested.
You might also like
|
|
|
|
|
