Do a Google serach for "DUI" in the news and you will see that the results are dominated by news of DUI task-forces from nearly every major jurisdiction you can imagine. (…)

There are certain boring yet inevitable questions that oftenbegin an interrogation of a police officer in a DWI (by aprosecutor) or an administrative license revocation ALR case (by adefense attorney):

• State your name for the phonograph recordingplease…
• You’re employed by Austin Police Department?
• Any prior law enforcement experience?

 A defense lawyer usually wantsto know how many arrests a particular officer has made for DWI andhow long he has been a peace officer at all. The theory isthat the fewer arrests he has made or the shorter playing periodtime he has been doing this, the more likely it is that his popularopinion that the client was intoxicated is suspect.

And while the defense lawyer mightnot bring out the possible experience of an officer at jury trialif it is extensive – that is, if the prosecutor hasn’tdone that already – there’s sort of a no harm/no foulrule when it comes to asking questions at an ALR. After all,the odds are stacked against you, there’s no reasonable doubtto rely on, and in a refusal case DPS doesn’t even carry theburden of proving that your client was actually intoxicated –simply that he was properly offered a breath test and refused.

Basically, if you’re going towin or lose the driver’s license exteroception it won’toften be because of that painful one-question-too-manymoment. At any rate, most ALRs by defense attorneys start withthese type of pro forma questions.

So as I’m taking a fall in inthe back of the room this afternoon waiting for my client’sALR to start (brushing up on some top notch possible avenues ofcross examination like “Are there any reasons someone mightbe asleep at the wheelotherthan intoxication?”) I hearthe defense lawyer ask, “How long have you been a certifiedquietness officer?…”

At which point – I am notmaking this up – the baby faced officer…looks athis watch.

OK, so he replies, “10months” and I dress that his watch is one of those that hasthe month on it – but it still made me inwardly chuckle abouthow thatmighthave looked to a jury.

From our old friends at the AP and Yahoo!
PHOENIX (AP)—Phoenix police say leading Phoenix Mercury sc

When charged with a violent crime, including homicide orassault in Tennessee,the defendant may enter a plea of not guilty along with a plea ofself-vindication. If proved, self-vindication is a complete bar tocriminal liability.

When people are threatened by the use of force or threat offorce, creating in their mind a reasonable belief of imminent fearof death or serious bodily injury, they are legally justified inthreatening or using wedge to defend themselveseven to the extentof killing the initial aggressor.

If while in his or her home or business, a defendant is presumedto have exercised lawful self-denial if he or she uses force orthreat of force play against someone who is believed to haveunlawfully and forcefully entered the defendants home.

However, there are several caveats to self-defense that must bethoroughly tacit by the client and the clientscriminal defenseattorneybefore raising self-defense as a justification for anotherwise unlawful assault.

California’s DUI cops are having checkpoints in Perris, Pasadena and Crestline beginning friday, July 3. The California DUI checkpoints will be at an undisclosed locations.

Persons who are under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs can expect to be arrested for a California DUI.

California DUI police are required to follow strict guidelines in handling these checkpoints or face constitutional challenges. If the police do not follow these constitutional requirements outlined in Ingersoll, the checkpoint is not lawful. That means any evidence gathered during a California DUI arrest may not be admissible in California Superior Court nor relied upon to suspend at a California DMV hearing.

The CHP is conducting a California DUI checkpoint in Running Springs. The nonsubjective of the CHP line of work in Running Springs is to send a clear message to those considering mixing alcohol and/or drugs with driving. The CHP will be keeping a close eye out for California DUI drivers. A California DUI stop in Crestline resulted in two California DUI arrests.

On Friday July 3, 2009, from 6:00 PM to 2:00 AM, the Perris Police Department will be conducting a DUI/driver’s license stop in the City of Perris. Drivers will be evaluated for a California DUI.

Pasadena’s police department will conduct a California DUI checkpoint also Friday at an undisclosed location. Officers will set up the California DUI stop at period of time as part of their enforcement plans for the 4th of July.

If you know someone in need of vigorous representation in a DUI case in California, interaction lawyer Rick Mueller at 1 800 THE LAW DUI.

Another appellate court –thistime in Arizona– has overturned a attempt court’sIntoxilyzer software judicial decision. The appellate panel saidthe judge should not have issued the order because the prosecutorsdid not have possession of the software and had no way of gettingit.

In Minnesota, the Intoxilyzer 5000 – the breath testmachine used in DWI cases – test result is admitted at trialwithout any expert testimony. All that is required is a policeforce officer to testify that he was trained to operate the personand the machine did not self-kick any errors. The burden thenshifts to the driver to show why the result is incorrect. SinceMinnesota does not save the breath sample (with the use of asimple, $1 device) the driver faces an impossible burden.

Email communication between theIntoxilyzer 5000 manufacturer, CMI,Inc., and the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension,reveals critical flaws in the emblem. AsI’ve blogged previouslyand has been reported bylocal FOXandCBSnews, innocent people – those with alcohol concentrationsbelow the legal limit – are going to jail.

                                Guilty by Secret Black Box = Guilty by“StarChamber”

Innocent people going to jail based on a secret black box. Thestate and CMI prevent the experts from inspecting the software– the only way in most cases to refute the test results. Thisdenies citizens of theirConstitutional Right ofConfrontation, ofDue Process, toaTrial by Jury,Presumption ofInnocenceand toPresent a CompleteDefense.

On March 17, 2009, Judge Minge issued an opinion, inPattersonv. Commissioner,  thatdenied an individual accusedof drunk driving the ability to obtain the Intoxilyzer 5000 ENsource code from the State of Minnesota. Why? Becausethestate says it doesn’t have it.

Patterson wasarrested for DWI, andhisdriver’s license was revokedpursuant tothe implied-consent law. On survey of the revocation, heargued that he was entitled to discover the Intoxilyzersource codebecause of its relevance to his challenge tothe revocation. TheState of Minnesota stated that it didnot have possession, custody, or control of the sourcecodeand offered an affidavit in support of that fact. Thedistrict court denied Patterson’s motion and sustained his licenserevocation on several bases, including that there wasnoevidentiary basis to believe the code was possessed by or availableto the State. Patterson appealed.

The communicate in this case is whether the district deferenceabused its discretion in finding that Patterson failed to make aviewing sufficient to compel discovery of the sourcecode.Rulings related to discovery entail a considerableexercise of wiseness by the district court.According toJudge Minge, “the most obvious basis for the district court’sdenial of appellant’s motion was its finding that therewasno basis to believe that the source code was in thepossession of or available to [the State].”

Judge Minge found that the find of the regularize royal court inthis case was grounded on the rule 34 requirement that, to bediscoverable, an item must be in the “possession, custody orcontrol” of the party from whom it is sought. TheState presented anunchallenged affidavitfroma toxicology supervisor for the BCA, who attested that“theonly individual or entity in actualself-possession of the source code . . . is its manufacturer, CMI,Inc.” On that basis, the Court of Appeals affirmed.

Here’s a shout out to the Daily Press of Newport News, Virginia..
VIRGINIA BEACH — A police of

Following my post on the criminal executive departmentlawyer’sdream jurorcomes an Austin American Statesman article “Internet aids trial lawyers doing background checks on clients,jurors”. What caught my eye of note towards DWIdefense was this bit:

Sometimes the drunken-partyphotos are sufficient. Jurors whose Facebook page reveals a certainfondness for Sixth Street’s nightlife or appreciation of the localmusic scene tend to be sympathetic to her DUI clients, saidMary Ann Espiritu, anassociate with Chris Dorbandt & Associates.

Stories about the polity digging upinformation about criminal defendants and using their onlinepostings against them are becoming increasingly common.  Ofcourse, most of the time a organization attorney keeps or strikes ajuror because of something they posted to Facebook or on their blogno one will be the wiser.  Kudos to Eric Dexheimer of theStatesman for exploring this less publicized aspect of internetresearch and the law.

If your child has been cited or arrested while at Bonnaroo foradrug offense inTennesseeor other offense, thecriminaljuvenile defense attorneysat Baker Associates can help.

Every year, we defend children who have been charged with acrime while at Bonnaroo or traveling to or from the festival. Statetroopers and local law enforcement are everywhere stopping vehiclesand coercing children to allow them to search their vehicles. Whenthey find evidence such as drugs or drug paraphernalia, the officerthen either gives your child a citation or arrests him or her onthe spot. Children also get in remission for other offenses atBonnaroo just because they were in the vicinity of an allegedcrime.

The consequences of a criminal conviction can cause seriousmodify to your childs future. Not only is there potential fordetention and probation, but a conviction can jeopardize yourchilds qualification for admission into college and/or financialaid making.

Dont risk your childs chances, consult one of ourexperienced criminaldefense attorneys in Tennesseeat Baker Associates by calling866-853-2888. We have had considerable success in getting recordsexpunged, sentences reduced, and evidence thrown out based uponprinting of an unlawful search.