Utah Governor Jon Huntsman announced Tuesday that he would not support a proposal to create a statewide database to track patron's visits to bars within Utah borders. The Governor stated that the proposal would unnecessarily deter tourism at a time when the state is attempting to modernize its' liquor laws and attract a higher number of tourists to the area.
Of the proposed bar database, Governor Huntsman stated, "I think it would enhance the oddness of our laws. I think that for most people that is a rather frightening, almost Orwellian, proposition." Current liquor laws in the state of Utah require every customer to fill out an application and pay a fee to enter an establishment that serves liquor. Despite the fact that bars in Utah are open to the public, they are still considered "private clubs" that only members and sponsored guests may utilize.
The statewide database has been publicized by several members of the state legislature as a way to deter bar hopping while compromising with Governor Huntsman on his proposal to eliminate Utah's private club system. Since taking office in 2005, Huntsman has voiced his opposition to the private club system saying it is a deterrent to tourists as well as people considering moving to the state. According to the Governor, it is time to bring Utah into a modern era where the state trusts those legally allowed to consume alcoholic beverages.
In response to Governor Huntsman's attempts to disassemble the private club system, Utah's bars have offered to scan customer's drivers' licenses but not enter them into a database. Many bar owners recognize that creating a database of bar customers could potentially be as bad for business as the private club system. However, Utah state lawmakers have gone as far as to suggest that the statewide database information could be kept as long as several weeks.
State legislators have attempted to rally support for the bar database by hyping the database's possible usefulness for law enforcement officials in DUI investigations. The problem with this proposal is that the database would not provide information on whether or not alcoholic beverages were purchased at the establishment, only that a person had their license scanned there. However, Senate President Michael Waddoups has suggested, "Perhaps it would be a tool for law enforcement if there was a DUI incident to find out at least the number of establishments that someone had frequented."
Please take some time to visit our websites:
San Francisco DUI Attorney
San Mateo DUI Lawyer
Marin County DUI Defense
Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers
San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers
Officials of Centre County, Pennsylvania, have announced plans to launch a brand new division within the county superior court system which is designed specifically to address the needs of driving under the influence (DUI) offenders. The new DUI court has been said to combine punishment as well as treatment into a more effective sentencing alternative in an effort to decrease driving under the influence incidents. Centre County Board of Commissioners Chaiman John Eich predicts that that new DUI Court will reduce the repeat DUI offender rate by as much as ten to fifteen percent.
This special court supervised program, which is funded by grant money from the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, is open to individuals guilty of three or more driving under the influence offenses.
The idea for the new DUI program came from the realization that the current method of penalizing DUI offenders has, thus far, been largely unsuccessful. According to Judge Bradley Lunsford, "One of the drawbacks to how we treat repeat offenders now is that we essentially warehouse them. We try to give them some therapeutic intervention, but it's really limited. At the end of the period of incarceration we open the door and release an alcohol dependant person back into the community."
In a departure from previous court programs, the purpose of this program is to help participants reconnect with the community while supporting the offenders on a wide range of individual needs, in addition to addiction. Program Administrator Cathy Arbogast shed light on this new concept, explaining, "A lot of these folks have lost their homes, they don't have a job, they may have physical or mental health disorders. It's hard to expect them to focus on their drug and alcohol treatment when they're dealing with these other things."
The judges and program administrators who will be working in the new DUI court have emphasized that the number one priority of program staff is to create an environment of positive peer pressure in which multiple DUI offenders can succeed and make positive lifestyle changes. "You get rewards for doing what you're supposed to be doing, which could include less community service hours or gift certificates donated from businesses," Arbogast added.
The goal of the DUI court is to encourage the program participants to make lasting lifestyle changes that will hopefully translate into a decrease in DUI numbers. Arbogast emphasized this point by stating, "You will get in more trouble for not showing up with your urine than showing up with a positive sample. Showing up shows you acknowledge you need more treatment. It's a completely different way of thinking."
Please take some time to visit our websites:
San Francisco DUI Attorney
San Mateo DUI Lawyer
Marin County DUI Defense
Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers
San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers
State lawmakers in Texas are proposing a new bill which would alter existing laws to allow state law enforcement agencies to set up sobriety checkpoints, in an effort to crack down on drunk driving. In 1994, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruled that, according to the United States Supreme Court, sobriety checkpoints cannot be used unless there are approved statewide procedures for conducting sobriety checkpoints.
The proposed law, Senate Bill 298, was introduced by Texas State Senator John Carona and would give the Texas Department of Public Safety and local law enforcement agencies the authority to create field sobriety checkpoints on public highways or streets in order to determine whether individuals are driving while under the influence. The law will take effect immediately if it receives a two thirds vote from both houses of the state congress.
According to State Senator Carona, the law is long overdue, stating, "Texas does currently have the most DWIs, and it's one of the states that continues to fight against this legislation. If we're going to save lives and we're going to make the roads safer for everyone, our families, our children, then this is long overdue."
Some members of the public have also voiced their support of the new law, explaining that the sobriety checkpoints will help to encourage drivers to think about the possible consequences of their actions, arguing, "The promotion, the publicity for it makes people make a plan. They should be doing that anyway, but they're not because too many people are being injured."
While a portion of the public is in favor of such a measure, Texan defense attorneys overwhelmingly oppose the passage of such a law, stating that sobriety checkpoints are a violation of an individual's fourth amendment right, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures. According to Dallas defense attorney Patrick McClain, "It's a slippery slope, giving up our rights to privacy and to intrusiveness to law enforcement when we haven't done anything that indicates we have broken the law." Members of the public have also agreed with this viewpoint, seeing checkpoints as a blatant attack on personal liberties.
Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) has been a vocal supporter of sobriety checkpoints since the Supreme Court's ruling on the issue in 1990. MADD also has a history of attacking those who disapprove of sobriety checkpoints, stating, "Opponents of sobriety checkpoints tend to be those who drink and drive frequently and are concerned about being caught." This statement has angered numerous lawmakers and citizens, which has only served to augment opposition to the passage of sobriety checkpoints and increase hostility between those in favor of sobriety checkpoints and those who are against them.
Please take some time to visit our websites:
San Francisco DUI Attorney
San Mateo DUI Lawyer
Marin County DUI Defense
Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers
San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers
Law enforcement agencies across the state of Arizona recently announced that they will increasing the number of law enforcement officers who will receive phlebotomy training next year. This training is used for the purpose of determining the blood alcohol concentration of an individual suspected of driving under the influence. Over the past fifteen years, law enforcement agencies have begun to move away from Breathalyzer testing in favor of blood samples drawn by phlebotomists because they are considered far more accurate and are subject to far fewer challenges by defense attorneys.
The money used to fund the training of these law enforcement officers is part of a $4.5 million grant package the state annually receives from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The state of Arizona has been provided this grant because of its status as an opportunity state, where nearly one third of traffic fatalities are linked to drinking and driving. This grant will allow the Governor's Office of Highway Safety to put about 170 extra officers through the five day phlebotomy training program, in addition to the 100 slots available to Arizona law enforcement officers last year.
Arizona state officials have begun to realize that, in light of the constant challenges to breath alcohol test evidence, blood evidence is more likely to lead to a driving under the influence conviction. According to Alan Haywood, officer and program coordinator for the Department of Public Safety, "Breath testing is primarily used throughout the state, but blood is being used more and more. We call it the CSI effect: Juries and judges want evidence, and they like the blood."
However, this training of police officers has raised a large amount of concern amongst criminal defense attorneys as well as the general public. By training officers to perform the duties of a phlebotomist, many worry that the likelihood of drawing a suspect's blood on the side of the road in unsafe conditions will skyrocket. Fortifying these concerns are recent statements made by Pima County Sheriff's Deputy, Koi Greene, who stated that the hands on training she received as part of the five day phlebotomy training made her increasing comfortable with the idea of drawing blood from a DUI suspect on the side of the road.
This confidence in roadside blood draws directly contradicts Pima County Superior Court Judge Fields' ruling made in late October which emphasized that the Arizona Department of Public Safety's (DPS) practice of drawing blood from individuals on the side of the road did not satisfy the state's health precautions laid out by the Department of Public Safety. According to Judge Fields, the high likelihood that the blood draw would occur in an environment ill suited for such testing elevates the possibility of infection to unacceptable levels.
Defense attorneys across Arizona have spoken out against this training, saying that an officer's ability to draw blood will result in blood work being done in situations and under circumstances that are not in the best interest of the suspect. According to Tucson criminal defense attorney, James Nesci, "You need a license to cut hair in Arizona, but you don't need a license to puncture a vein and draw blood. That in and of itself is frightening. There are a couple (of) other things that go along with that. Was the person who drew your blood mad at you? Was it an adversarial situation?"
Please take some time to visit our websites:
San Francisco DUI Attorney
San Mateo DUI Lawyer
Marin County DUI Defense
Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers
San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers
Suspected drunk drivers in South Carolina will soon face harsher penalties for refusing to submit to blood alcohol concentration testing. Under the current law, drivers who refuse to the breath or blood test face an automatic license suspension ranging from three to six months. The new law, which will go into effect on February 10, 2009, will increase this automatic suspension to six to fifteen months, depending on whether the individual has any prior convictions.
In addition to increasing license suspension periods, the state of South Carolina is also increasing sentences for individuals with extremely high blood alcohol concentrations. South Carolina legislators agreed that if the state was going to adopt a policy of increasing penalties for high blood alcohol levels, a change needed to be made to the license suspension period as well, so that individuals are not encouraged to refuse a chemical test. "Anytime you raise the penalty for higher blood alcohol concentrations, you run the risk that more people will refuse the test. So, you have to raise the penalty for refusals," stated 7th Circuit Solicitor Trey Gowdy.
Greenville Police Chief Terri Wilfong believes that more drivers will take the extended suspension period into consideration when deciding whether or not to submit to a blood alcohol test.
Laura Hudson, legislative liason for the South Carolina chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD)stated that while South Carolina's new legislation is a step in the right direction, there are additional precautions the state could adopt to combat the drunk driving epidemic plaguing South Carolina. Hudson argued that it would be in the best interest of South Carolina residents if suspected drunk drivers did not have the opportunity to drive while awaiting their DMV hearing. She emphasized, "It's not about finding loopholes. It's about public safety-or that's what it should be."
Similar DUI refusal laws have been proposed across the country. A new law taking effect January 1, 2009 in Illinois increases the license suspension period to six months for individuals who fail a blood alcohol test and raises the automatic suspension to twelve months for suspected offenders who refuse to submit to a chemical test.
Please take some time to visit our websites:
San Francisco DUI Attorney
San Mateo DUI Lawyer
Marin County DUI Defense
Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers
San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers
Recent reports presented by the Pennsylvania DUI Association in Harrisburg indicate that local law enforcement officers are not receiving the level of training necessary to successfully identify and arrest drunk drivers.
Last year alone, there were 53,717 DUI arrests in the state of Pennsylvania, a slight increase from last year's tally of 50,587 drunk driving arrests. In response to these statistics, George Geisler, the director of law enforcement personnel at the Pennsylvania DUI Association in Harrisburg stated, "Since DUI is the number one crime in the state, you would think you would have the number one amount of training for that crime." However, Geisler's assertion does not prove accurate. According to reports, state police are provided with a week's worth of academy training to detect, arrest, and prosecute drunk drivers, while municipal police officers are afforded less than a day of similar training at the academy.
While Geisler has voiced his opinion that local law enforcement officers are in desperate need of additional training in order to bring them up to the level of state police officers, not everyone agrees with his assertion. Lieutenant Scott Laird of the Springettsbury Township Police and Sergeant Rod Varner of the York Area Regional Police say that the driving under the influence training offered is more than sufficient for officers to successfully detect, arrest, and prosecute drunk driving offenders.
According to Laird and Varner, the most valuable portion of an officer's DUI education comes not from in class instruction, but from on-the-street experience. Following an officer's completion of the mandatory twenty week police academy training, most municipal police departments require that new officers complete twelve weeks of supervised field training before initiation onto the force, which was cited as yet another reason not to increase DUI training for local police officers.
Additionally, Laird and Varner asserted that there are safeguards in place in order to assist municipal law enforcement officers, which precludes the need for additional training.
Please take some time to visit our websites:
San Francisco DUI Attorney
San Mateo DUI Lawyer
Marin County DUI Defense
Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers
San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers
According to a recent report published by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), Washington was identified as one of twenty five states that has not made necessary changes to state laws in an effort to combat drunk driving. Acting Chairman of the NTSB held a meeting early this morning in Washington, D.C. to chastise the states, especially Washington, for their lack of progress in the fight against drunk drivers.
During the NTSB's meeting, the Board reiterated their recommendation for a model program based on eleven elements designed to curb drunk driving. Since the board issued its' recommendations several years ago, at least thirty one states have adopted one or more elements of the model program. While no state has adopted all eleven elements, five states, including California, New Hampshire, Ohio, Utah, and Virginia, stand out for their significant progress based on the NTSB's recommendations. Despite this good news, the NTSB emphasized that the remaining forty five states need to step up their game significantly in order to comply with the NTSB's recommendations.
The most widely noted problem in Washington's attempt to decrease the number of driving under the influence arrests is the fact that state legislators declared sobriety checkpoints unconstitutional in the mid 1980s. In an effort to encourage the renewed adoption of sobriety checkpoints, the Washington Traffic Safety Commission launched a campaign to emphasize the effectiveness of sobriety checkpoints. However, this effort failed earlier this year. In the absence of checkpoints, the state of Washington has been forced to bulk up their roaming patrols in order to compensate for the absence of police checkpoints.
Despite the failure of last years' efforts to reestablish sobriety checkpoints in Washington, traffic safety advocates are hopeful that they will be able to rally support for future legislation. "We do believe that checkpoints could be set up with safeguards that would absolutely make it legal and not impinge on people's freedom," said Spokeswoman for the Washington Traffic Safety Commission, M.J. Haught.
The NTSB also faulted the state of Washington for allowing plea bargains for first time DUI defendants, not impounding cars driven by drunk driving suspects, and failing to create a statewide system of DUI courts to track repeat DUI offenders.
Although the state of Washington still considers sobriety checkpoints unconstitutional, the state legislature has strengthened other laws related to driving under the influence violations. Beginning January 1, 2009, DUI offenders will face enhanced sentencing requirements which will require the installation of ignition interlock devices that would prevent a vehicle from starting or continuing to operate if alcohol is detected on the driver's breath.
Please take some time to visit our websites:
San Francisco DUI Attorney
San Mateo DUI Lawyer
Marin County DUI Defense
Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers
San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers
Ohio State Senator John Carey recently voiced his concern that the Ohio Controlling Board acted too hastily by approving the spending of $6.4 million for new drunk driving testing machines. Senator Carey's opinions surfaced following the release of several reports in The Plain Dealer which describe how thousands of driving under the influence cases have been delayed or dismissed due to questions of accuracy of the Intoxilyzer 8000. The Ohio Controlling Board plans to utilize the funds to purchase several Intoxilyzer 8000 models for distribution across the state.
Late last Friday, Senator Carey wrote a letter to President of the Controlling Board, Joe Secrest, voicing his concern over the newly drafted contract and requesting that funding approval be put on hold until several issues regarding the Intoxilyzer 8000 can be addressed. Senator Carey also stated in the letter that he is concerned about the lawsuits against the company that manufactures the Intoxilyzer 8000, CMI Inc. Carey wrote, "My greatest concern is that, as a result of pending litigation in other states, DWI offenders could potentially get off as a result of using these machines...At the very least, it seems likely we will be in for lengthy and costly litigation issues surrounding CMI's refusal to release source code information...have been cleared up."
Adding to Senator Carey's speculation of the new contract between the state of Ohio and CMI, Inc., it has come to light that the Chief of the Bureau of Alcohol and Drug Testing at the Ohio Department of Health, Dean Ward, has admitted to maintaining friendships with individuals employed by CMI. Ward was the individual who made the decision to offer the exclusive contract to CMI. CMI is charging the state of Ohio almost $9,000 per machine, while other states that used a competitive bidding process ended up paying significantly less for their breath testing equipment.
National Patent President John Fusco stated that he could not understand why the state of Ohio would agree to an exclusive deal with an out of state company, especially in light of the newsworthy legal troubles CMI has been enduring over the past several months. CMI competitors, including National Patent Analytical Systems, Inc., who made about ninety percent of DUI testing machines currently used within the state of Ohio, accused Ward of steering the contract to his friends at CMI.
In defense of his decision to enter into a contract with CMI, Ward stated that he has used CMI's products since his years as a Cincinnati police officer and that in his experiences with the Intoxilyzer 8000, he found the machine to be incredibly reliable. Ward emphasized that his decision to utilize CMI's products was not based on his friendship with CMI's employees and that the Ohio Department of Public Safety would work to address Senator Carey's concerns.
Please take some time to visit our websites:
San Francisco DUI Attorney
San Mateo DUI Lawyer
Marin County DUI Defense
Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers
San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers
A recent study funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation has revealed that higher taxes on alcohol may help to cut down on the number of alcohol related fatalities. Using information collected from death certificates, Dr. Alexander Wagenaar, a professor at the University of Florida's Department of Epidemiology and Health Policy Research and his research team compiled a list of the number of deaths caused by alcohol and number of deaths linked to alcohol in Alaska between 1976 and 2004.
Alcohol related deaths in Alaska were compared with data from other states in order to control for common nationwide factors like population growth and advanced medical care. From this data comparison, researchers found twenty three fewer deaths per year after a 1983 alcohol tax hike and twenty one fewer deaths per year after a 2002 tax increase.
Alaska was chosen as the sample state for the study because of Alaska's large alcohol tax increase in 2002. Despite the fact that Alaska's general population is composed of fewer than one million people, researchers believe that the state is comparable to the rest of the nation in terms of epidemiological trends. Wagenaar supported his research team's decision to focus on drinking statistics from Alaska, stating, "There's no reason to think the experience in Alaska would be different than anywhere else. The study looks at the responsiveness of drinking."
However, Wagenaar and his group of researchers are not the only ones investigating this topic. A similar study was recently conducted in Finland, where researchers examined the relationship between alcohol taxes and alcohol related deaths. Finland is an ideal country to test this link in, because, for many years, Finland maintained a very high tax rate on alcohol. However, in 2004, the Finnish government lowered the alcohol tax between thirty three and forty four percent in order to maintain a high level of domestic alcohol sales.
Following this drastic tax decrease, alcohol consumption levels increased nearly fifty percent from the previous year. Finnish researchers concluded, "Taxation has indeed been found to be the most cost-effective measure in reducing alcohol consumption. Raising alcohol tax level has low costs and is effective in reducing alcohol consumption and thus alcohol-related harms." Researchers also determined that the number of drunk and disorderly conduct arrests increased by over ten percent following the tax decrease.
Wagenaar and his researchers have linked their evidence to a broader, more general trend which was also observed following increases in taxes on tobacco. According to Wagenaar, "When the excise tax on tobacco went up, consumption went down and the diseases associated with tobacco also went down. Now, with the current study, we're finding the same thing for alcohol. Simply adjusting taxes has quite a noticeable rate on alcohol deaths. They parallel each other quite a bit."
In addition to the public health implications of raising alcohol taxes, alcohol excise taxes could also be used to benefit the flailing economy, "Given state budgets are in the toilet bowl, it's an available source of revenue that has not been looked to for a very long time. The tax increases are long overdue. The product doesn't pay its way in covering economic and social costs associated with its use."
However, while researchers and state legislators are publicizing the positive effects an increase in alcohol tax would have, the American Beverage Licensees (ABL), who represent retailers of beer, wine, and spirits, have voiced their strong opposition to the proposed tax increase. According to the Executive Director of the American Beverage Licensees, Harry Wiles, "Based on historical evidence, raising taxes on alcohol beverages would have a highly negative impact on the economy. Increasing alcohol taxes could lead diminishing returns for the government should responsible, moderate consumers decrease their consumption." It is the belief of the alcohol industry that raising taxes would penalize the responsible social drinkers, not the alcohol abusers, who most likely would not be deterred by an increase in the price of alcohol.
Ultimately, efforts to raise taxes on alcohol have been deemed neo-Prohibitionist by both the alcohol industry and by mainstream America, despite the availability of evidence which reveals that increasing alcohol taxes may be an effective means of driving down the number of driving under the influence and alcohol related accidents and fatalities. George Hacker, Director of Alcohol Policies Project for the Center for Science in the Public Interest, argued that, "The legacy of Prohibition leaves sour tastes about doing anything about curbing alcohol use. It conjures images of Prohibition. The industry stokes it as much as it can. The industry uses the imagery and metaphor of freedom and civil right, almost like it is a civil right to drink, given it was once prohibited."
Please take some time to visit our websites:
San Francisco DUI Attorney
San Mateo DUI Lawyer
Marin County DUI Defense
Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers
San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers
It has become increasingly common over the past several years for police officers to utilize pre-written DUI arrest reports in order to document drunk driving cases. Reasons for this dishonesty range from the officer's desire to save time to the need to present convincing evidence that an individual was driving under the influence, even in situations where such evidence is not available. Additionally, these acts of deceitfulness are not isolated incidents. Such acts have been recorded across the country.
For example, in 2001, Illinois State Police trooper Joan Blomenkamp was charged for filing dozens of false DUI reports. Blomenkamp's actions were only discovered after her police reports were compared to videotape evidence which had been collected in several of her cases. These tapes directly contradicted Blomenkamp's written description of events.
More recently, in Florida, a local news station uncovered dozens of DUI cases where pre-written arrest reports were blatantly utilized. In one case, investigators discovered that a local law enforcement officer had used the same exact phrase in at least ten different arrest reports written during a six month period, regardless of the individual's blood alcohol concentration.
Attorneys have begun to recognize the increasing commonality of this occurrence and have suggested that videotape evidence would help to cut down on the number of false police reports filed and would also prevent individuals from being wrongly convicted of driving under the influence.
Utah criminal defense attorney Jason Schatz has been a voracious supporter of requiring dashboard cameras in police vehicles, arguing that videotaping DUI arrests is a matter of fairness. In an effort to encourage Utah legislators to adopt mandatory videotaping of DUI arrests, Schatz stated, "You look at the police report and you'd think this person is falling down drunk, then you see the tape and you say, 'Wait a minute, that doesn't look the way it was described on paper.'"
Schatz says that in his years of experience as a criminal defense attorney, he has tried numerous cases where videotape evidence shot during the field sobriety testing of a client directly contradicts what an officer wrote down in the police report. Because of the severe repercussions for individuals convicted of driving under the influence, Schatz argues that requiring the installation of dashboard cameras is a necessary precaution that must be taken in order to prevent the prosecution of individuals who may have be charged with DUI based on the whims of an overzealous police officer. Schatz points out that, "It is a huge problem if it's your license at stake and that could mean your job or going to jail."
However, not everyone agrees that videotaping DUI arrests is a worthwhile use of money. Chief Prosecutor for Salt Lake City, Utah, Sim Gill, feels that videotape evidence most often does not make or break pending DUI cases. Gill would rather see money spent on other divisions of law enforcement, like increasing funding for domestic violence shelters and providing medical attention to mentally ill prison inmates.
Please take some time to visit our websites:
San Francisco DUI Attorney
San Mateo DUI Lawyer
Marin County DUI Defense
Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers
San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers
At the beginning of this year, the Arizona legislature announced that the state's crime lab budget would be cut in half, leaving only $7.8 million annually for testing. In response to this cut and in an effort to curb excessive spending, the Payson Police Department has decided to hold back about eighty percent of physical evidence processed by the Department of Public Safety (DPS).
With the adoption of this new policy, evidence would be processed on a case by case basis, depending on whether the case was going to progress to trial. This differs from the Payson Police Department's past policy where, for example, a blood sample from anyone arrested for driving under the influence was automatically sent to the DPS crime lab for processing.
Last year, the town of Payson ran up a crime lab bill of nearly $200,000 after submitting 800 different evidence samples for testing. In an effort to reduce the cost burden on the small town, the Department of Public Safety shifted funds from the Gang and Immigration Intelligence Team Enforcement Mission and applied the funds to the city's crime lab bill. While the cost to the city was sharply reduced as a result of this action, a remaining balance of $30,000 for last year's services still remained to be paid.
Even with this drop in price, the town is ill prepared to pay off this debt because the city's 2008 budget does not include any allocution of funds for evidence processing. Therefore, the town of Payson has been forced to decide which cases truly warrant spending on evidence processing. Chief Don Engler explained the Payson Police Department's decision to limit evidence testing, stating, "We have to limit our expenses as best we can. We are still in a holding pattern trying to see what we want to do."
Although Payson is attempting to cut costs with as little impact on pending cases as possible by addressing the request for evidence testing on a case by case basis, this new policy forces prosecutors to decide whether they want to go to trial before having the necessary evidence in hand. Detective Matt Van Camp stated, "This makes the prosecutor's job harder. Crime labs also prove people innocent, not just guilty."
Please take some time to visit our websites:
San Francisco DUI Attorney
San Mateo DUI Lawyer
Marin County DUI Defense
Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers
San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers
On September 30, a new law took effect in Ohio which allows authorities to force drivers with two or more driving under the influence arrests to submit to blood or urine tests without their consent. If a repeat drunk driver suspected of driving under the influence refuses to submit to a chemical test, police are entitled to use "reasonable means" to have a medical worker physically take the blood sample. This law will apply to individuals who have a previous felony in their record, who have two or more convictions in the last six years for operating a vehicle while intoxicated, or who have five or more DUI convictions in the last twenty years.
Local prosecutors have been frustrated by individuals suspected of driving under the influence refusing to submit to a chemical test to reveal their blood alcohol concentration. The passage of this law would help to quell the prosecutor's frustration. Assistant Hamilton County Prosecutor Brian Goodyear explained, "Frankly, the idea behind this is to limit the ability of people to refuse having their blood or breath tested after they've demonstrated a pattern of (drunken driving)." Prior to the new law, in order to obtain a conviction, prosecutors had to rely on eyewitness testimony of people who saw how much alcohol the defendant consumed in cases where the individual refused to submit to the chemical test.
While prosecutors are strongly in favor of the new law, there are a number of people who are outraged by the evasive new law and who believe it is a blatant violation of a driver's civil rights. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has added that the forced chemical test is highly unconstitutional because the law gives police authority to obtain a sample without a warrant, which may lead to an abuse of police power.
In addition to the provision of the law which allows for forced chemical tests, the new law will also set up a searchable online database of drunk drivers. The new law requires the courts to send the Ohio Department of Public Safety the records of individuals that have been convicted of driving under the influence at least five times over the last twenty years. Those convicted of multiple driving under the influence offenses will have their name, address, and crime posted on the public internet database. The law mandates that the Department of Public Safety have the database up and working by the end of 2008. Approximately 30,000 people in Ohio have been convicted of five or more drunk driving offenses.
The law also includes a provision which requires treatment for alcoholism for repeat driving under the influence offenders, increases penalties for repeat offenses, and in some cases, will require the installment of an ignition interlock system for convicted DUI offenders.
Please take some time to visit our websites:
San Francisco DUI Attorney
San Mateo DUI Lawyer
Marin County DUI Defense
Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers
San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers
In San Marcos, the San Diego county funded North Inland Community Prevention Program (NICPP) is pushing for the passage of an ordinance which would require businesses in San Marcos that sell alcoholic beverages to have their employees trained and certified in responsible beverage service.
A report published in 2007 by San Diego's Health and Human Service Agency identified a number of bars and restaurants in San Marcos as the last place that numerous DUI program participants purchased alcoholic beverages prior to being arrested for driving under the influence. NICPP director Clark Kiser has stated that the proposed ordinance is designed to encourage the city to take a closer look at establishments that are having difficulties transitioning from restaurants to nightclubs. By requiring training of all employees who serve alcoholic beverages, the more likely it is that those establishments will not serve to excess, which hopefully will lead to a drop in DUI arrests.
Underage drinking is also an issue which would be addressed by the new ordinance. According to evidence collected through a number of local sting operations conducted by the Alcoholic Beverage Control department (ABC), twenty one percent of San Marcos bars and restaurants sold alcohol to underage drinkers and twelve percent of adults purchased alcoholic beverages that were handed off to underage drinkers. The NICPP has stated that responsible beverage sales and service training would help to cut down on the number of underage drinkers and individuals who over-consume by teaching servers how to detect false IDs and how to properly refuse service to heavily intoxicated drinkers.
Currently, the Alcoholic Beverage Control department (ABC) offers free responsible beverage sales and service certification training, however, the training is not required by San Diego County. Last year, ABC trained nearly eighteen thousand alcohol servers across the state of California.
The Student and Neighborhood Relations Commission (SNRC) held a meeting in July to discuss the feasibility of the proposed ordinance. Deputy City Manager Lydia Romero stated that the city attorney and code compliance department would render their decision on the ordinance after collecting input from stakeholders and the public. The staff report is tentatively scheduled for presentation during the Student and Neighborhood Relations Commission's October 13 meeting.
Similar ordinances to the one proposed in San Marcos have been passed in nearby Poway and Solana Beach.
Please take some time to visit our websites:
San Francisco DUI Attorney
San Mateo DUI Lawyer
Marin County DUI Defense
Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers
San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers
|
