DUI Category Archives — Page 12 of 18 — Jacksonville Criminal Lawyer Blog Published by Jacksonville, Florida Criminal Defense Attorney

Drugs Found in Vehicle After DUI Arrest may Be Admissible at DUI Trial in Florida

Published on: December 12, 2010 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

In a recent DUI case near Jacksonville, Florida, the defendant was pulled over by police for failing to maintain a single lane. The police officer conducted a DUI investigation and decided the defendant was impaired while driving his vehicle. The police officer observed vomit on the defendant and in his vehicle, glassy and bloodshot eyes and slurred speech. The police officer then searched the defendant’s car and found a pill bottle containing Hydrocodone pills (Lorcet). The defendant had a prescription for the Hydrocodone pills. He denied drinking but admitted taking the prescription drugs three days prior to driving.

The criminal defense lawyer for the defendant tried to keep the evidence of the Hydrocodone away from the jury. The criminal defense attorney argued that evidence of the prescription drugs was prejudicial and not necessary for the state to prove its DUI case. The court ultimately disagreed and found that the evidence of the Hydrocodone pills was admissible.

In a DUI case in Florida where there is evidence of drug use, even if it’s a prescription drug, that evidence may be admissible in certain circumstances. For instance, the relevant factors under Florida law are: 1) there is significant evidence the defendant was impaired while driving, 2) there is evidence that the defendant recently used the drug, 3) there is not enough evidence that the defendant used some substance other than the drug which would explain his/her impairment, such as alcohol, and 4) the evidence does not show that the drug did not cause the impairment.

Police Can Detain A Person Asleep in a Vehicle for a DUI Investigation

Published on: December 6, 2010 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

In Florida, in order for the police to detain someone for further investigation, whether for a drug related crime or a DUI, the police must have some specific evidence of the criminal activity before going further with the investigation.

In a recent case, the police observed a person slumped in the driver’s seat of a car parked at a convenience store. The car was running. The police went to the car and saw the woman sleeping in the driver’s seat. The police knocked on the door to wake her but were unsuccessful. The police officer said he smelled an odor of alcohol coming from the inside of the vehicle. The police then opened the door. He had to shake the person to wake her. They ultimately conducted a DUI investigation and arrested her for DUI.

The criminal defense lawyer attempted to get any evidence that the defendant was intoxicated thrown out by arguing that the police did not have a legal basis to open her door and remove her from the vehicle. The court disagreed. In Florida, the police cannot search a vehicle or a person or seize or detain a person without specific evidence of criminal activity. In this case, the court found that the evidence that the woman was sleeping in the driver’s seat of a running car, the woman would not wake up with the police banging on the window and the odor of alcohol was sufficient for the police officer to open the woman’s car door and investigate further.

Woman Arrested for DUI After Crashing Into St. Johns County Police Car

Published on: November 15, 2010 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

A woman was arrested for DUI (driving under the influence of alcohol) after she allegedly crashed into a police car in St. Augustine, Florida according to an artidle on FirstCoastNews.com. Apparently, the suspect’s mother called the St. Johns County Sheriff’s Office out of concern for her daughter. When the St. Johns County police arrived, they saw the suspect speeding down the road. She ultimately crashed into a St. Johns County police car. Apparently, no one was injured, but the vehicles did sustain damage.

When the police have sufficient evidence that a person is driving while impaired by drugs or alcohol, they normally charge the person with DUI. While a first DUI is a misdemeanor, it comes with potentially serious penalties such as a license suspension, a large fine, community service and the possibility of jail time. These penalties get worse as a person gets more DUI’s. When an accident is involved, the charge becomes DUI with property damage, assuming no one is injured in the accident. This is also a misdemeanor but often comes with greater penalties. If there is an accident with a serious injury, the person will likely be charged with a felony. In this case, the possibility of doing some jail or prison time increases. Finally, if there is an accident with a death, the charge is DUI manslaughter, and if the state can prove its case, significant prison time becomes more likely.

In Florida, Statements Made After an Accident May Not Be Admissible in DUI Case.

Published on: September 15, 2010 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

In any driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs (DUI) case in Florida, the state has to prove that the defendant was actually driving, or in actual physical control of, the vehicle. That seems obvious, but it may be problematic for the state in situations where the police respond to an accident and the drivers and others are out of the vehicles at the time. Accidents happen quickly, and sometimes, no one actually sees who is driving. Then, one may think it is as simple as the police officer asking who was driving. However, the initial discussion between the police officer and the driver about the accident is often inadmissible in a criminal case for DUI.

This is referred to as the Florida accident report privilege. This Florida law says that a driver is required to tell the police what happened after an accident. However, because this requirement affects a person’s right to remain silent if there is possibly criminal activity involved, any statements the driver makes about the accident during the accident investigation phase are not admissible in a criminal case. When the state cannot use the statement by the driver that he/she was driving the vehicle, the state may have a very hard time actually proving the suspect was driving a vehicle.

Even where the statement that a suspect was driving is not protected by the accident report privilege, the statement is still not admissible in a DUI trial unless and until the state can prove that a crime was committed by substantial evidence independent of the statement. In other words, if there is insufficient evidence to prove that the suspect may have committed a DUI and the suspect then makes incriminating statements about committing a DUI, that statement will not be admissible in a DUI trial. So, before such a statement can be used against a defendant in a DUI trial, the state must have other evidence that he/she committed the crime. Going back to the original point, when an accident occurs and the police show up after the fact, a suspect’s statement may be thrown out of a criminal trial if there are no solid witnesses or other evidence establishing that a DUI was committed.

Police Can Only Draw Blood in DUI Case In Limited Circumstances in Florida

Published on: September 6, 2010 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

When a police officer suspects a person of driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs (i.e. DUI), he/she will sometimes request a blood draw to measure blood alcohol content rather than a breath test, or breathalyzer, or a urine test. While an officer can request a breath test, or breathalyzer, or a urine test from a suspect when he/she has good reason to believe the suspect is intoxicated from alcohol and/or drugs to the extent his/her normal faculties are impaired, i.e. DUI, that officer is not as free to request blood to investigate a DUI as blood tests are more intrusive than breath and urine tests.

Under Florida law, a police officer can only request a blood draw to check for DUI if: 1) the police officer has reason to believe the suspect was operating the vehicle under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs, 2) the suspect appears for treatment at a medical facility and 3) a breath or urine test is impractical or impossible. A person can always consent or agree to a blood test, but that consent must be free and voluntary. If a police officer requests a blood draw when all three of the above factors are not present without notifying the suspect that a blood test is not required and that implied consent only applies to a breath or urine test, then consent to a blood test for DUI is not valid.

The three factors allowing police to request a blood test for DUI are most often present in serious accidents. However, if a person is in a less serious accident and does not need medical treatment, a blood test is likely inappropriate. Blood tests are not the norm for DUI investigations in Florida. If you have been arrested for DUI in the Jacksonville, Florida area, or even been asked by a police officer to submit to a blood test and think you may be arrested for DUI in the future, feel free to contact us for a free consultation. It is certainly possible that the police officer was not justified in requesting the blood draw and any incriminating blood alcohol test results may be inadmissible in court.

Jacksonville is the Worst Speed Trap in Florida

Published on: September 3, 2010 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

We recently posted an article about how police in Jacksonville and throughout Florida are emphasizing DUI stops and arrests more than ever. It is important for people to know their rights when they are stopped by a police officer who believes he/she may be driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. A guilty or no contest plea to DUI in Florida brings about very serious consequences from a prolonged license suspension to significant fines and the possibility of a jail sentence. For that reason, if you have been stopped for a possible DUI or arrested for DUI in the Jacksonville area, consider immediately contacting a DUI attorney in Jacksonville with the experience to properly handle your DUI case.

We also came across a recent article in the Jacksonville news that said Jacksonville is the worst speed trap city in Florida. Of course, a speeding ticket is nowhere near as serious as a DUI. In Florida, a DUI is a misdemeanor crime that carries serious penalties. If a person gets a third DUI, the state has the option of charging him/her with a felony that carries up to five years in prison. A speeding ticket is a civil infraction for which a person can be fined, although that fine can be fairly high depending on the difference between the person’s speed and the speed limit. Additionally, with a speeding ticket and other traffic infractions, points can be assessed on a person’s driver’s license if the traffic citation results in a conviction. If a person gets too many points in a certain period of time or fails to properly deal with the traffic citation, that could result in a suspended license. If a person gets stopped for driving with a suspended license, he/she will likely be arrested for the crime of driving with a suspended license which is a misdemeanor crime and, like a DUI charge, can be upgraded to a felony crime in Florida once a person accumulates enough driving with a suspended license convictions.

Florida Police Stepping Up Drunk Driving (DUI) Arrests Now Through Labor Day

Published on: August 27, 2010 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

You may have seen commercials sponsored by police and other law enforcement agencies warning people that they will be arrested for DUI if they drive drunk. The slogan for the advertisement is, “Over the Limit, Under Arrest.” Of course, in Florida the legal limit for DUI is 0.08.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) recently announced that they are beginning their annual drunk driving (DUI) arrest campaign. More than 11,000 police and law enforcement agencies all over the country will take part in the effort to make driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs (DUI) arrests. That means there will be more DUI checkpoints, and police officers will be more inclined to conduct DUI investigations and make DUI arrests after traffic stops. The NHTSA pointed to a survey which showed that approximately 8% of all drivers polled admitted to driving drunk when they thought they were over the legal DUI limit last year.

Obviously, we can all agree that preventing drunk driving is important. However, the issue arises as to who is considered a drunk driver. As criminal defense lawyers in Jacksonville, Florida who have handled many DUI cases, we know how subjective DUI arrests can be. Basically, if a police officer pulls a driver over and believes the driver is intoxicated, the officer can make an arrest. Ninety nine times out of a hundred, that arrest report will say the officer smelled a strong odor of alcohol, was slurring his/her speech, had bloodshot, watery eyes and was swaying. Once a police officer draws the conclusion that the driver is drunk, that assumption will cloud all of the police officer’s observations during the DUI investigation. If the police choose not to have a video camera at the scene, the police officer’s observations cannot be verified objectively. The arrest is completely subjective. And when there are quotas or specific campaigns to arrest drunk drivers for DUI like this one, the line between a drunk driver and a driver who may have just had a couple of drinks with dinner and feels fine is blurred.

Woman Arrested For DUI After Her Daughter Calls Police From Car

Published on: August 18, 2010 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

Police received a call that a woman was driving under the influence of alcohol, located the vehicle and arrested the driver for DUI. Most DUI investigations occur after police claim to see a driver violate some traffic law such as speeding, swerving outside the lane or running a red light. The police officer stops the vehicle and claims to observe signs of alcohol use and impairment such as an odor of alcohol, bloodshot and watery eyes and slurred speech. Occasionally, police officers set up roadblocks or checkpoints where vehicles are stopped at certain intervals and the drivers are checked for possible DUI, driving with a suspended license or an outstanding warrant.

Less often, the police will get a call from a witness, perhaps another driver on the road, who reports that a driver is driving erratically and may be DUI. We have never heard of a situation where the call to police actually comes from someone in the same vehicle as the suspected DUI driver, and it is the driver’s daughter, no less, as the article indicates.

When the police get a call from an anonymous caller that someone is committing a crime, whether it is a DUI, sale of drugs or any other crime, the police cannot just pull the car over or detain the person on the street when they find him/her. The police officer must identify the suspect and observe something concrete which supports the claim that the person is engaging in criminal activity. In the case of an anonymous DUI call, the police officer would have to at least observe some swerving or other traffic violation. When the call comes from an identified source and provides specific information about criminal activity, the police have more authority to make a stop based solely on the caller’s information. In this case, if the daughter of the suspected DUI driver is calling and she is in the car, it is likely that the police had a legal right to stop the woman and initiate a DUI investigation.

Florida DUI Case is Thrown Out After Police Violate the Law to Get Medical Records

Published on: July 11, 2010 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

In a recent DUI case near Jacksonville, Florida, the case was thrown out of court after it was determined that the police obtained incriminating medical records about the defendant in violation of the law. In this DUI case, the defendant was involved in an accident and ultimately went to the hospital for treatment. The police officer who responded to the accident noted some signs of impairment from alcohol about the defendant and then went to the hospital to continue his DUI investigation. By the time the police officer arrived at the hospital to observe and question the defendant, the defendant had left the hospital against the doctor’s orders.

Prior to the defendant leaving the hospital, the hospital staff had discovered some incriminating DUI evidence against the defendant that was documented in his medical records. When the police officer arrived at the hospital, he obtained a copy of the defendant’s medical records without the defendant’s consent and without a subpoena signed by a judge. Those medical records were used against the defendant in the DUI case.

In Florida, everyone has a strong privacy right to keep his/her medical records confidential. The general rule is that hospitals and other medical personnel cannot disclose one’s medical records to anyone without the patient’s permission. One exception to that rule allows government or law enforcement officials in a criminal case (or the other party in a civil case) to obtain copies of a person’s medical records if they are relevant to the issues in the case. However, those records can only be released upon service of a valid subpoena.

4th DUI Offenders May Be Able to Get Driver’s License Back in Florida

Published on: May 28, 2010 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

In Florida, a first time DUI, without an accident and injuries, is always a misdemeanor, but the penalties can still be quite severe. They range from possible jail time to a license suspension a fine and community service. The more DUI convictions a person gets, the more severe the penalties can be. In Florida, a third DUI charge can be charged as a felony which carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison. With a fourth DUI conviction, Florida law requires that the person’s driver’s license be suspended permanently.

However, a new proposed law in Florida would allow people with four DUI convictions and a permanent license revocation to possibly regain their driving privileges, according to an article on Firstcoastnews.com. With the proposed law, the person would have to go though educational courses and have an interlock device installed in his/her vehicle. An interlock device is a breathalyzer that the driver must blow into and pass before the car will start.

Interestingly, MADD supports the bill. Their reasoning is that there are a lot of people with permanently suspended licenses who are going to drive one way or another. With this law, those people would at least have the interlock device on their vehicles so they would not be able to drive their cars if they were under the influence of alcohol.