Results tagged “law” from DUI Lawyers & Attorneys News

A New Mexico man has learned that you don't need to be driving to get arrested and charged for DWI.

Fidencio Francia was arrested for DWI after police found him pulled over on the side road asleep in his vehicle.

Francia thought he was doing the responsible thing by sleeping in his vehicle instead of driving while intoxicated. 

"I didn't wanna hurt anyone, because I felt I wasn't gonna be able to drive safe," said Francia. "I could have got in my truck and started it and tried to drive away, but I didn't."

Francia was woken up by the police, who asked him to take a field sobriety test and submit to a breathalyzer test.  When he blew a .13, he was arrested on DWI charges.

So how can a driver be charged with driving while intoxicated without actually driving?

According to District Attorney Kari Brandenburg, New Mexico has laws that state if a driver is in control of the vehicle, meaning he or she is in the driver's seat and has access to the keys, and the driver can turn on the vehicle and operate it, then he or she can be charged with DWI.

Because Francia placed his keys in the center console of his vehicle, the judge said it was a cut-and-dry case because his keys were within his reach.

Not all cases are as cut-and-dry as Francia's. Each case has different circumstances and is analyzed according to the facts of the case.  For example, if a driver were to place his or her keys in the trunk of a vehicle, they may not be found guilty of DWI since they cannot easily get to the keys to start the car.

To learn if there are similar DWI laws in your state, click here to find a DWI lawyer near you!

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has signed into law a measure that requires those convicted of DUI to install an ignition interlock device in their vehicles.

When an ignition interlock device is installed in a vehicle, the driver is required to blow into the device before the car will start.  If the driver's blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is above .08 percent (the legal limit in California), the vehicle will not start.

The measure will be tested on DUI offenders in Alameda, Los Angeles, Sacramento, and Tulare Counties before it becomes effective statewide.  The installation of the devices will be paid by the offenders, not the tax payers.

The author of the bill, Assembly member Mike Feuer (D - Los Angeles), feels strongly that the project will save hundreds of lives. Statistics have shown that repeat DUI offenses have decreased by as much as 70% in some states that require first-time DUI offenders to install a device in their vehicle.  

In 2007 alone, there were nearly 204,000 DUI arrests made in California, which averages out to 558 DUI arrests every day.  Of the 204,000 arrests, 45,149 were repeat offenders.  These drivers caused more than 53,000 traffic accidents, resulting in the death of 1,501 people.

The project takes effect on July 1, 2010 and will last until January 1, 2016. The California Department of Motor Vehicles plans to report the effectiveness of the project to the state legislature by July 1, 2015, which will then decide whether or not to expand the law to all counties.

To learn more about similar laws in your state, please click here to contact a DUI attorney near you.

Lawmakers in North Carolina are proposing a change to DWI laws that could put people convicted of multiple DWIs back behind on the wheel.

Under current law, once an individual has been convicted of DWI four times, he or she will lose his or her driver's license for life.  The proposed changes to the law would increase that to five DWI convictions.

DWI offenders would be given another chance to keep their licenses if they stay out of trouble for ten years after a fourth conviction.  If an offender drives while impaired again, they would permanently lose their license for a fifth conviction.

Lawmakers who support the bill say that people who've gone through counseling and rehabilitation for ten years deserve to be given another chance.

Despite approval from lawmakers, law enforcement officers aren't as supportive of the bill. Assistant District Attorney Dough Carriker said the bill is unnecessary, and that it doesn't give offenders a second chance--it gives them a fifth chance.  

"From the point of view of a prosecutor, you want to reduce the number of drunk drivers on the road," said Carriker. "These are people with four convictions on the road. It's not true to call this bill to give offenders a second chance. It's going to give them a fifth chance."

The bill was passed by the Senate and now heads to the House for a vote.  If the House approves the bill and the Governor doesn't veto it, the law would go into effect on December 1 of this year.

To learn more, click here to find a DWI attorney near you. 

Louisiana state Rep. Tim Burns (R-Mandeville) has proposed a new measure that would increase the penalties for those who refuse to submit to a breathalyzer test during a DWI stop.

Under the current DWI laws, refusing a breath test can result in a 180 day license suspension, while a second refusal can result in an 18-month suspension. A third refusal can result in criminal penalties.

The new law would enforce stricter penalties, with a first refusal punishable by a one-year driver's license suspension.

"In many cases, a lot of attorneys often advise their clients not to (take the breathalyzer test), and in a way, it evades the purpose and the meaning of the law," said Burns.

Louisiana lawmakers passed the bill, and have since passed it onto Governor Bobby Jindal, who is expected to sign the bill into law.

While the measure hasn't seen much resistance, there are some mixed reactions to it on the streets.  Some people think drivers who're suspected of DWI should be required to submit to a breathalyzer test, whereas others believe making breathalyzer tests mandatory is an infringement on civil rights.

Regardless of any public dissent, Burns stands by his legislation.

"You don't have a right to drive, you have a privilege that's given to you, and you have to abide by the terms of the law," said Burns.  "If you've had stuff to drink, it's real easy, if you've had something to drink, don't drive. Get somebody to drive you, or stay where you are, or plan ahead."

For more information about breath test refusal laws, click here to find a DWI attorney near you.  

Lawmakers in New York are considering legislation that would require drivers who've been convicted of DWI to install an ignition interlock device in their vehicle. 

Ignition interlock devices require drivers to blow into the device before they can start the car. If alcohol is detected on the driver's breath, the car won't start.

According the group Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), studies have shown that the presence of ignition interlock devices in a vehicle reduce repeat DUI offenses by 64 percent.

"Research shows that first-time drunk drivers simply haven't made a one-time bad decision. On average, first-time offenders have driven drunk 87 times before they are ever caught the first time," said MADD National President Laura Dean-Moody.

In addition to blowing into the device before starting the vehicle, some people--depending on their offense--may be required to blow into the device while they are driving. If alcohol is detected on their breath the car lights or horn may go off, and the driver will be required to check in with his or her probation officer from time to time.

The New York Senate has passed legislation like this before, and will likely pass it again.  However, it may have difficulty passing in the Assembly. If the bill passes, New York will be the 11th state to enact this type of law.

For more information about ignition interlock devices, click here to find a DWI/DUI attorney near you. 

Lawmakers in Pennsylvania are considering a new measure that would require first-time DUI offenders to install an ignition interlock device in their vehicle. Under the current law, drivers are required to install the device after a second DUI offense.

The ignition interlock device works by the driver blowing into the device before he or she can start the vehicle. If the driver's blood alcohol concentration (BAC) registers above the legal limit, the car will not start.

On Wednesday, the Pennsylvania House Transportation Committee heard testimony both for and against the use of the device for first-time offenders.  Supporters of the measure said that first-time offenders are usually not first time drinkers, and the laws should be applied to them too.  Opponents, however, argue that the decision to install the device should be made on a case by case basis.

If the bill passes, drivers will likely be required to install the device in their vehicle for one year.

To learn more, please contact a DUI attorney near you.

A new West Virginia DUI bill has been proposed that calls for stricter penalties for repeat DUI offenders.

The Evans-Perry Bill, named after two families involved in a deadly DUI crash in 2007, would not only call for tougher penalties for repeat offenders, but it would also prevent multiple DUI offenders from obtaining driver's licenses in other states.

The bill calls for staggered sentencing for repeat DUI offenders, jail or prison for a first-time sentence, and probation and alcohol treatment for the second.

Five members of the Evans and Perry families were killed and several others were injured in an accident caused by Brian Stone, who was driving on a revoked license and had multiple DUI convictions on his record.  Stone is currently serving time in prison for the accident.

For more information about DUI law, click here to find a DUI attorney near you.

A police officer in Springfield, Missouri is being charged on six counts stemming from two separate crashes that took place within minutes of each other.

Officer Joseph Motte, 54, was charged with driving while intoxicated, leaving the scene of an accident, two counts of possession of a loaded firearm while intoxicated, and two counts of imprudent driving. Motte, 10-year veteran, could lose his badge if found guilty of the charges.

According to police, Motte failed to stop when he struck an 18-wheel truck on I-44. After traveling for seven miles, his car went off the road and struck a cable barrier. At the scene of the second accident emergency workers found a flask and several cans of beer in Motte's car. Police also found two loaded weapons in the vehicle. Furthermore, according to police reports Motte failed a field sobriety test and smelled strongly of alcohol.

According to Missouri State Highway Patrol Trooper Wesley Collins, Motte was incoherent and unsure of his surroundings. Motte asked the paramedics what happened to his car. When the paramedic told him he had been in an accident, Motte said, "No I haven't. Something happened to my windshield."

As of now Motte has remained on active duty while the charges are pending, and was put on paid administrative leave. However, Motte could be taken off paid administrative leave at the conclusion of an internal investigation that is currently ongoing, which is likely to be finished by next week.

"Every time there is an allegation of misconduct on the part of one of our employees, there has to be an investigation process that protects their rights," said Springfield Police Chief Lynn Rowe.

For more information about the drunk driving laws in your state, please click here to find a DWI lawyer near you!