Law enforcement officers in all 50 states utilize Standardized filed sobriety tests (SFSTs) to determine the impairment of a person’s driving due to alcohol influence. The SFSTs are comprised of a battery of three tests: 1) Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus test (HGN), 2) Walk and Turn Test (WAT) and 3) One Leg Stand Test (OLS). For a more in-depth explanation of these SFSTs click

here

.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) developed these SFSTs and is in charge of training law enforcement personnel on the procedures of the SFSTs. NHTSA conducted a series of scientific research studies to determine the accuracy of the SFSTs. After collecting data from these studies, NHTSA analyzed the laboratory data and found:

• HGN—by itself, was 77% accurate
• WAT—by itself, was 68% accurate
• OLS—by itself, was 65% accurate
• By combining HGN and WAT and 80% accuracy can be achieved.

One can therefore see from the results above, that even if the proper procedures are followed by officers conducting the SFST, these filed tests are at best 80% accurate in determining the impairment of drivers.

Read more . . .

Thanks to lawyers that have been fighting for the source code that controls the operation of the Intoxilyzer it looks like the tide is turning. Previously, prosecutors all over the country have been objecting to turning it over because it is a “trade secret” and that the State does not have it in their possession.

Some Judges have Ordered CMI to turn it over and the company has been flatly refusing to do so. See Contempt Order here. cmi-turnover-order.pdf

CMI has finally decided to cooperate. They are willing to let it be examined subject to a protective order. I don’t believe this has been accomplished yet and we have not seen the proposed protective order and how restrictive it will be. See attached. CMI memo

Continue . . .

“All prescription sleeping pills may sometimes cause sleep-driving,” federal health officials warned Wednesday.

Sleep driving is a variation of sleepwalking. It involves getting in the car in the middle of the night, driving around, and with absolutely no memory of the drive.

The Food and Drug Administration wouldn’t say exactly how many cases of sleep-driving it had linked to insomnia drugs, but neurology chief Dr. Russell Katz said the agency uncovered more than a dozen reports — and is worried that more are going uncounted. Given the millions of prescriptions for insomnia drugs, Katz called the problem rare, and said he was unaware of any deaths. But because sleep-driving is so dangerous — and there are precautions that patients can take — the FDA ordered a series of strict new steps Wednesday. First, the makers of 13 sleep drugs must put warnings on their labels about two rare but serious side effects: • sleep-driving, along with other less dangerous “complex sleep-related behaviors” — like making phone calls, fixing and eating food, and having sex while still asleep. • and life-threatening allergic reactions, as well as severe facial swelling, both of which can occur either the first time the pills are taken or anytime thereafter. Next, doctors this week will begin getting letters notifying them of the new warnings. Ambien isn’t the only insomnia drug that can cause sleep-driving — any of the class known as “sedative-hypnotics” can, FDA’s Katz stressed Wednesday. To lower the risk of a sleep-driving episode, he advised patients to never take any prescription insomnia drug along with alcohol or another sedating drug, or take higher-than-recommended doses of the pills. Some of the insomnia drugs may be riskier than others, so FDA also recommended that manufacturers conduct clinical trials to figure that out.

The drugs that the FDA seem concerned about are: Ambien; Butisol sodium; Carbrital; Dalmane; Doral; Halcion; Lunesta; Placidyl; Prosom; Restoril; Rozerem; Seconal; Sonata.

I have long thought that some of my client’s behavior has been related to their prescription use. It is now nice to have a FDA study to back my contention. Now, if I could just get the officers on the APD DWI Task Force to read the FDA study.

Continue . . .

There are many different types of driving offenses, all of which hold penalties and consequences for those guilty of committing them. The most serious and expensive driving offences is DWI. Being found guilty of this particular offense can result in serious consequences and have serious implications for the future. The undesirable effects of being charged with DWI, which can include increased insurance costs, hefty fines, driving disqualification, alcohol assessment and treatment. If you believe that you have unfairly been accused of DWI it is important to seek legal assistance as soon as possible.

Continue . . .

A qualified DWI attorney can review your case for defects, compel discovery of calibration and maintenance records for breath machines, can have your blood samples analyzed independently, negotiate for a lesser charge or reduced sentence and obtain expert witnesses for your trial. A skilled lawyer can also debate if the blood technician received adequate training, or if laboratory staff handled urine samples properly.

You should consider a DWI attorney with an outstanding reputation and remember: the prosecution relies only on the results of breath, blood, and urine tests, any discrepancy in the execution and examination of such tests can prove crucial to their validity and to your freedom.

Continue . . .

§ 31.124 of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code states, “an enforcement officer may stop and board a vessel . . . and may inspect the boat” to determine whether it is in compliance with the various provisions of the Code.

What this means for the average lake-goer is that an officer has the power to stop his or her boat without probable cause or a reasonable suspicion to believe that a crime has been or is about to be committed. Basically, a law enforcement officer may board any boat, for absolutely any reason and, once aboard, may legally come into contact with evidence of a possible crime, like boating while intoxicated. More on Random Boat Stops and the 4th Amendment

Should drunk-driving charges necessitate a judge’s removal from the bench? Suppose he’s wearing a dress when arrested. Should that matter?

Those are the weighty questions being flung around by the Boston bar these days after Robert Somma, a bankruptcy judge who was arrested while wearing a dress and was later charged with drunken driving, resigned from the federal judiciary. He then reportedly tried to unresign, according to the Boston Globe.

On February 13, Somma (pictured in mug shot from the Boston Globe) pleaded no contest in New Hampshire to a first-degree misdemeanor charge of driving while intoxicated and agreed to pay $600 in fines and penalties in connection with a February 6 car accident. He had rear-ended a pickup truck at a traffic light.

As his lawyer later confirmed, he was wearing a woman’s dress and appeared to have makeup on. Somma submitted his resignation two days later.

His resignation was originally to take effect April 1. But officials at the First Circuit delayed it for six weeks after Somma began expressing second thoughts. The resignation was supposed to take place five days ago, but Somma is reportedly still employed by the federal judiciary, leaving the legal community to wonder whether a letter-writing campaign, led by Paul D. Moore, urging the court to let Somma rescind his resignation, might have worked.

“We?re all continuing to wait with some hope,” Goodwin Procter?s Michael J. Pappone told Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly. Pappone practiced law with Somma and signed the petition. “We?re all speculating. All of us who supported urging him to reconsider certainly hope that the 1st Circuit allows him to withdraw his resignation and restores our excellent bankruptcy bench in Massachusetts to full strength.”

In a letter to Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly posted online on April 1, Somma wrote that an outpouring of support from judges, lawyers, and others had led him to conclude, “contrary to my initial belief, that the media frenzy occasioned by this episode would not be an impediment to my continued service as a judge.”

Spokeswomen for the U.S. Courts for the First Circuit and the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts in D.C. declined to comment on Somma’s status.

Read more . . .

GLENDALE, Calif. — In October, 2006, Haley Joel Osment pleaded no contest to misdemeanor drunken driving and drug possession charges resulting from a July accident in which he crashed his car into a mailbox.

Superior Court Judge John Doyle sentenced the 18-year-old actor to three years probation and ordered Osment to spend 60 hours in an alcohol rehabilitation and education program, as well as attend at least 26 Alcoholics Anonymous meetings over a six-month period. Osment, who didn’t attend the court hearing, also must pay $1,500 in fines. The actor’s attorney, David Wood, entered the no contest pleas on his client’s behalf to one count each of misdemeanor driving under the influence and misdemeanor marijuana possession. Two other charges — another misdemeanor DUI and a vehicle code infraction — were dropped by prosecutors.

Osment fractured a rib and injured his shoulder when he crashed and flipped his 1995 Saturn in La Canada Flintridge on July 20. No one else was in the car, which hit a mailbox mounted on a brick base.

Continue . . .

Your hematocrit level is the ratio of aqueous portions and solid portions of your blood. When alcohol enters your bloodstream it is carried in the plasma (liquid portion). Alcohol does not get absorbed into the red blood cells and other solid material in your blood Someone with a higher hematocrit level will have more solid parts in their blood and therefore will have less space for the alcohol to disperse in the liquid portion of the blood. Normal hematocrit differences can elevate a BAC by 10% to 14%.

Continue . . .

I know a well-kept secret of the insurance industry—one unknown to most personal injury victims of car accidents, truck accidents, SUV rollovers and other motor vehicle crashes: namely, Texas state law (and likely that of some other states) automatically includes "personal injury protection" (PIP) insurance coverage and “uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage” (UM/UIM) in the typical family auto liability insurance policy. However, in Texas that is not the case if the policyholder rejects that coverage in writing at the time the liability coverage is purchased or renewed. This personal injury help note discusses some basic legal rights involving auto insurance policies in Texas.

Usually, PIP coverage will provide fairly quick reimbursement for medical and other health care expenditures, as well as for certain lost income and other common financial setbacks or “inconveniences” to the Texas car accident injury victim. Additionally, the PIP claims process is a rather simple one. Each Texas policy should have a $2,500 minimum of coverage.

UM/UIM, on the other hand, exists to provide the policyholder (and certain others) with protection from “the other guy” who either has no liability insurance coverage, or has less coverage than the total of all of the personal injury victim's legal losses — called "damages" — such as pain and suffering, mental anguish and so on. In Texas, each policy should have a $20,000 minimum of such UM/UIM coverage.

Importantly, because PIP and UM/UIM coverages usually are quite cheap, I strongly believe that there rarely is any excuse for not buying as much coverage as possible from your insurance agency. Thus, I first would decide how much you are willing to pay to protect yourself and your family; next, ask the price of the highest limits you can afford for UM/UIM coverage (and for liability coverage, which in Texas cannot have a coverage limit less than that of the UM/UIM coverage); then, choose wisely, for you or a loved one just might need those extra insurance benefits for the rapidly mounting medical expenses, lost earnings or other losses. Remember, it’s too late to buy that extra protection after the wreck.

Read more . . .