If you have been arrested for a DUI in Pittsburgh, PA, you are most likely going to need a proven attorney to defend your rights. Receiving a DUI Pennsylvania can also be referred to as drunk driving, driving while impaired (DWI) or the new driving after imbibing (DAI). DUI laws in PA are can be severe and your only hope can be a criminal defense attorney that specializes in DUI cases.
There are two types of cases that come after receiving a DUI. The first case takes place through the criminal court, they can assign multiple penalties including fines, jail, loss of driving privileges, mandatory alcohol programs, and more. The second case involves the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, this is the one that can suspend driving privileges.
If you happen to be pulled over on suspicion of drunk driving, you have the right to refuse the breath, blood or urine test, however doing so will automatically result in a one year loss of driving privileges. This is because under Pennsylvania law, if you hold an operator’s (driver’s) license and are in physical control of a motor vehicle, you are deemed to have given implied consent to chemical tests.
If caught, the PA DUI laws specify that your punishment will be related to how much alcohol is in your system. The lowest level is enacted when you’re caught with a blood alcohol level (BAC) of .08 to .099. The intermediate level is .1 to .159. Anything over .16 is punished at the most severe level.
Additionally, the PA DUI laws provide for different punishments based on whether this is your first drunk driving arrest. Each subsequent arrest brings with it more severe penalties. The DUI arrests are calculated within the last 10 years. On a first time DUI, you do not have the right to a jury trial.
Last, when you get arrested for a DUI you can very likely face jail time, a license suspension, probation, community service, alcohol classes, and many fines and fees. Have a great lawyer on your side will drastically reduce these penalties and will allow you to get the best deal possible. Sometimes they can even get you out of the DUI all together and that is by far your best option.
Saturday, August 15, 2009
DUI Stops and Party Admissions
The burden of proof for a crime in the United States is on the prosecution. Many DUI defendants shoot themselves in the foot because they don’t understand the concept of evidentiary party admissions.
Miranda rights are something we see all the time on television and in movies. The repeated droning of “You have the right to remain silent…” is such that most people don’t think about what is really being said. When a police officer says the Miranda rights warning to you, he or she is saying you have the right to remain silent and ANYTHING you SAY may be used against you. This is because anything a defendant says is admissible in court.
You’ve been out on the town and are driving home. The tell tail red lights go on behind you. The officer starts asking you questions. In most cases, you should answer them courteously. That being said, you should also answer briefly and avoid “talking up” or arguing the officer in question. Why? Well, anything you say will be used against you.
There is a classic video on the web of a man who has been pulled over for drunk driving. All of the classic field sobriety tests are administered and he passes them without a hitch. Still, he is obviously hammered. The female police officer compliments him and suggests he can probably dance well to. The gent starts dancing and she asks him if he is professionally trained. His answer?
“No, I’m just drunk!”
Do you think this statement was raised in court? No, it wasn’t. Why? Because you can bet he took a plea deal because he would’ve been crushed at court. The entire episode was caught on television. Once the jury stopped laughing, they would’ve found him guilty and a harsh sentence would’ve been handed down.
Now, what if he didn’t say anything? Well, he passed all the tests so the best the officer could do is arrest him for driving while impaired and then seek out a blood test. He would then plead out on something less severe. It would still be painful, but not massively so.
Make no mistake. I am not suggesting you should drink and drive or there is any way to get around a conviction. That being said, the burden is on the government to prove a crime. Don’t do their job for them by making statements that make their case.
Miranda rights are something we see all the time on television and in movies. The repeated droning of “You have the right to remain silent…” is such that most people don’t think about what is really being said. When a police officer says the Miranda rights warning to you, he or she is saying you have the right to remain silent and ANYTHING you SAY may be used against you. This is because anything a defendant says is admissible in court.
You’ve been out on the town and are driving home. The tell tail red lights go on behind you. The officer starts asking you questions. In most cases, you should answer them courteously. That being said, you should also answer briefly and avoid “talking up” or arguing the officer in question. Why? Well, anything you say will be used against you.
There is a classic video on the web of a man who has been pulled over for drunk driving. All of the classic field sobriety tests are administered and he passes them without a hitch. Still, he is obviously hammered. The female police officer compliments him and suggests he can probably dance well to. The gent starts dancing and she asks him if he is professionally trained. His answer?
“No, I’m just drunk!”
Do you think this statement was raised in court? No, it wasn’t. Why? Because you can bet he took a plea deal because he would’ve been crushed at court. The entire episode was caught on television. Once the jury stopped laughing, they would’ve found him guilty and a harsh sentence would’ve been handed down.
Now, what if he didn’t say anything? Well, he passed all the tests so the best the officer could do is arrest him for driving while impaired and then seek out a blood test. He would then plead out on something less severe. It would still be painful, but not massively so.
Make no mistake. I am not suggesting you should drink and drive or there is any way to get around a conviction. That being said, the burden is on the government to prove a crime. Don’t do their job for them by making statements that make their case.
DUI Arrest – Understanding Your Prosecutor
A DUI arrest leads to a criminal case. This means you face the possibility of doing time in jail, probation, fines and administrative penalties like the loss of your license. The person who will be in charge of representing the government against you is the prosecutor.
A DUI is often the first real experience many people have with the criminal justice system. It is not a fun experience. Most defendants come into the system thinking justice is the goal of the court system. It is, but the means for getting to a “just result” is something very surprising to the average person.
In the sterile world of law school, the prosecutor is supposed to go for a just result. They are supposed to review the case objectively in relation to whether a crime has been committed and in regard to whether a charge should be levied. They are also supposed to be open minded towards dropping the case at any time evidence comes forth that points to the innocence of the defendant. Prosecutors in the real world rarely act this way.
The first thing most defendants in a DUI case say is they can’t believe how vicious the prosecutor in their case is. Instead of going for a just result, the prosecutor seems to be taking things personally and going after the defendant like a tiger. This is because the prosecutor’s reputation is based on getting convictions. If they want to move up in the chain of command, they have to produce results. If they want to run for political office, they need to be “strong on crime.” This means you are not a person to them. You are a mark to be made on their belt of convictions.
Does the defendant have anyone in their corner? Yes. They usually have their family, but their not much good in court. The only other person on their side is their defense attorney. If the prosecutor is coming at you like Attila the Hun, you want an attorney who is going to be returning just as much fire and perhaps even more. Ideally, your defense attorney should treat the case like they are the one on trial.
So, how does any of this end up in justice being done? Well, the general theory is if both sides battle like mad dogs, a just result will ultimately be reached. It sounds like a nice theory, but we all know what happens when people with lots of money go on trial. They can hire great defense attorneys who can often win the case. If you are arrested for a DUI, you need to be taking the same approach. If you’ve been spending for a rain day, you should consider this to be it.
Understand your prosecutor is fairly simple. They want to convict you for a DUI and any other charges that can strap on to your case. Spend the money to get a great DUI defense attorney. You need to fight fire with fire!
A DUI is often the first real experience many people have with the criminal justice system. It is not a fun experience. Most defendants come into the system thinking justice is the goal of the court system. It is, but the means for getting to a “just result” is something very surprising to the average person.
In the sterile world of law school, the prosecutor is supposed to go for a just result. They are supposed to review the case objectively in relation to whether a crime has been committed and in regard to whether a charge should be levied. They are also supposed to be open minded towards dropping the case at any time evidence comes forth that points to the innocence of the defendant. Prosecutors in the real world rarely act this way.
The first thing most defendants in a DUI case say is they can’t believe how vicious the prosecutor in their case is. Instead of going for a just result, the prosecutor seems to be taking things personally and going after the defendant like a tiger. This is because the prosecutor’s reputation is based on getting convictions. If they want to move up in the chain of command, they have to produce results. If they want to run for political office, they need to be “strong on crime.” This means you are not a person to them. You are a mark to be made on their belt of convictions.
Does the defendant have anyone in their corner? Yes. They usually have their family, but their not much good in court. The only other person on their side is their defense attorney. If the prosecutor is coming at you like Attila the Hun, you want an attorney who is going to be returning just as much fire and perhaps even more. Ideally, your defense attorney should treat the case like they are the one on trial.
So, how does any of this end up in justice being done? Well, the general theory is if both sides battle like mad dogs, a just result will ultimately be reached. It sounds like a nice theory, but we all know what happens when people with lots of money go on trial. They can hire great defense attorneys who can often win the case. If you are arrested for a DUI, you need to be taking the same approach. If you’ve been spending for a rain day, you should consider this to be it.
Understand your prosecutor is fairly simple. They want to convict you for a DUI and any other charges that can strap on to your case. Spend the money to get a great DUI defense attorney. You need to fight fire with fire!
DUI Cases – The Merits of the Breathalyzer or Lack Thereof
The tests used to determine drunk driving issues have become so familiar that few really think about them. The breathalyzer, for instance, is accepted as a carte blanche way for determining blood alcohol levels. Ah, but is it?
The breathalyzer has been with us in one form or another since the 1920s. Of course, it wasn’t called a breathalyzer at that time. The “breathalyzer” name was actually a particular product that was offered by…wait for it…Smith & Wesson. Yes, the gun maker! Much like Coke, the name slowly came to be used for the entire range of products that measure blood alcohol content via the breath.
The first effective device was known as a drunkometer. The device was the size of a shoe box and the offending person blew up a small balloon. The air in the balloon was then passed through an acidified potassium solution. If alcohol was present, the solution would change color. The more alcohol present, the more the color changed. It was an effective test, but not much good when it came to proving whether someone had consumed enough alcohol to be impaired. I won’t even get into the question of how color blind police officers were impacted!
Modern breath analyzers use various forms of chemical analysis. They do not actually determine the exact amount of alcohol in a person’s blood. Instead, they make an estimate based upon alcohol molecules that are present in a particular breath. Yes, an estimate. When a person is found to blow .07 [legal] or .08 [DUI], the figure is not exact. Given the fine margins, it seems a very questionable practice particularly when you consider how the law works.
In most states, the result of the breathalyzer has immense impact on the determination of guilt. If you are found to be above the stated blood alcohol content level under law, then the person is presumed in court to be legally impaired per se. The burden is then on the defendant to prove the analyzer results are wrong. This is an important switch for a device that isn’t all that accurate.
How accurate is the breathalyzer? Well, it depends on a host of issues. It can be affected by the temperature, the calibration, the administration abilities of the officer and so on. Most interesting, the person being tested can increase the reading by holding their breath. Alternatively, hyperventilating or exercising strenuously for 30 seconds will reduce a blood alcohol content reading by as much as 25 percent!
The breathalyzer is a standard testing device used in traffic stops where drunk driving is considered a possible issue. It is important to understand, however, that these devices are not absolute accurate and can be successfully challenged in court.
The breathalyzer has been with us in one form or another since the 1920s. Of course, it wasn’t called a breathalyzer at that time. The “breathalyzer” name was actually a particular product that was offered by…wait for it…Smith & Wesson. Yes, the gun maker! Much like Coke, the name slowly came to be used for the entire range of products that measure blood alcohol content via the breath.
The first effective device was known as a drunkometer. The device was the size of a shoe box and the offending person blew up a small balloon. The air in the balloon was then passed through an acidified potassium solution. If alcohol was present, the solution would change color. The more alcohol present, the more the color changed. It was an effective test, but not much good when it came to proving whether someone had consumed enough alcohol to be impaired. I won’t even get into the question of how color blind police officers were impacted!
Modern breath analyzers use various forms of chemical analysis. They do not actually determine the exact amount of alcohol in a person’s blood. Instead, they make an estimate based upon alcohol molecules that are present in a particular breath. Yes, an estimate. When a person is found to blow .07 [legal] or .08 [DUI], the figure is not exact. Given the fine margins, it seems a very questionable practice particularly when you consider how the law works.
In most states, the result of the breathalyzer has immense impact on the determination of guilt. If you are found to be above the stated blood alcohol content level under law, then the person is presumed in court to be legally impaired per se. The burden is then on the defendant to prove the analyzer results are wrong. This is an important switch for a device that isn’t all that accurate.
How accurate is the breathalyzer? Well, it depends on a host of issues. It can be affected by the temperature, the calibration, the administration abilities of the officer and so on. Most interesting, the person being tested can increase the reading by holding their breath. Alternatively, hyperventilating or exercising strenuously for 30 seconds will reduce a blood alcohol content reading by as much as 25 percent!
The breathalyzer is a standard testing device used in traffic stops where drunk driving is considered a possible issue. It is important to understand, however, that these devices are not absolute accurate and can be successfully challenged in court.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
