Articles Posted in DUI

The Illinois Court of Appeals recently affirmed a defendant’s conviction for aggravated DUI despite his argument that the trial court erroneously allowed the officer to testify as to the admonitions given before he refused a chemical test. However, the appeals court vacated the lower court’s order requiring the defendant to pay a $450 public defender fee.

Following a jury trial, defendant Weston Romanowski was convicted of aggravated DUI. On appeal, Romanowski contended that his conviction should be reversed because the circuit court erroneously permitted the arresting officer to testify that he was told of the potential civil penalties if he refused to submit to a blood-alcohol test. Romanowski further contended that the circuit court’s order requiring him to pay a public defender fee in the amount of $450 should be vacated, since no hearing was held concerning his ability to pay such a fee.

Continue reading →

Based on a new guidance released by the U.S. State Department (State Dept.), people who have nonimmigrant visas in the U.S. may face grave results if they are arrested for DUI or a DUI-related offense. In March of this year, the State Dept. publicized all material that is not classified within Volume 9 of its Foreign Affairs Manual, the State Dept. policy manual. Volume 9 authorizes the State Dept. to revoke a visa when it is notified of an arrest or conviction of a DUI or DUI-related offense.

The new policy is based on the State Dept.’s escalating concerns over drunk driving and DUI offenses. It reflects a significantly more stringent approach to addressing these issues than past policies. Under the new policy, the State Dept. can revoke an otherwise legitimate nonimmigrant visa instantly upon being notified of the DUI arrest. This can occur even when the person is physically within the U.S. The rationale is that the person is ineligible for the visa for mental or physical health-related reasons.

Continue reading →

The United States Supreme Court recently held in three consolidated appeals that the Fourth Amendment permits warrantless breath tests incident to arrest for drunk driving, but not warrantless blood tests.

To combat drunk driving, all states prohibit individuals from driving with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) over a prescribed level. BAC is generally determined using a blood or breath test. To enforce drivers’ cooperation, states have enacted “implied consent” laws requiring drivers to submit to BAC tests. The initial penalty for refusing these tests was a drivers’ license suspension. Over time, however, states have strengthened their DUI laws and have imposed stricter penalties for defendants with high BAC levels. Therefore, drivers fearing harsher punishments have greater reason to refuse testing. Some states now make it illegal to reject testing.

Continue reading →

The Illinois Court of Appeals for the Second District recently held that a delay in a hearing regarding the summary suspension of a defendant’s driving privileges attributable to a continuance did not entitle him to rescission of the suspension on the ground that he was not afforded a hearing within 30 days.

The Arizona Supreme Court held last month that a trial court should examine the totality of the circumstances to decide whether consent to a search was voluntary, even when it was given after a law enforcement officer’s assertion of his lawful authority to search. Put differently, an officer’s assertion of his lawful authority to search does not negate the court’s need to engage in a totality of the circumstances test to determine whether consent was voluntary.

In August 2012, an Arizona officer found appellant Francisco Valenzuela asleep in the driver’s seat of his stopped truck with the engine running. After spotting an open container, detecting an odor of alcohol, and observing other signs that Valenzuela was impaired, the officer arrested Valenzuela on suspicion of a DUI.

Continue reading →

Last month, New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez announced an initiative that will put volunteer monitors in courtrooms to police DUIs and report findings on social media to indicate whether these monitors, with no or minimal legal training, believe, in their lay opinion, that offenders were let off too easily. Governor Martinez said this is a way to hold offenders and judges accountable. Others believe is is an intimidation tactic.

The volunteers will attend DUI hearings and report on how the courts are handling drunk driving. They will then send details regarding the sentences to state officials, who will identify repeat DUI offenders and judges in tweets and Facebook posts.

The program, spearheaded by Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), is part of the Governor’s executive initiative to combat DUIs. Many believe that these public shaming tactics harken back to the “Scarlett Letter” days of Nathaniel Hawthorne.

Continue reading →

Florida Circuit Judge Charles Burton recently upheld North Lauderdale defendant Kenneth Jenkins’ 33-year sentence for DUI manslaughter, the longest sentence ever imposed in Florida for this crime.

Jenkins pleaded guilty to causing a 2008 head-on collision on Interstate 95 that killed three victims. Jenkins’ blood-alcohol level that night was .182, more than two times the legal limit. In fact, Jenkins was so drunk that he has no memory of the crash.

Continue reading →

The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently took issue with Indiana’s no-texting statute, explaining that Illinois’ “hands-free” statute was more sensible and effective.

Indiana statutorily prohibits drivers from texting while driving. All other cellphone use, however, is permitted. This includes making phone calls, consulting directions, reading news, playing music, playing games, and even watching television.

Continue reading →