Happy Labor Day! My father started out in the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen which became the United Transportation Union. My Mom was a proud member of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME). Without the good wages and benefits provided by their shared sacrifice, I could never have gone to college. Charles M. Rowland II salutes America’s hard-working men and women and joins in our shared hopes that all who seek work can find a [Read the full post. . .]
Kettering OVI checkpoint tonight! The Kettering Police Department will conduct an OVI sobriety checkpoint Friday night from 11:00 p.m. until 3:00 a.m. at the 1000 block of East Dorothy Lane. The OVI checkpoint will be accompanied by aggressive saturation patrols. This checkpoint is paid for by federal grant funds and is part of the Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over campaign.
If you want to receive updated information on Springfield OVI checkpoint locations, enhanced traffic enforcement, saturation patrols and other [Read the full post. . .]
If you have been following developments in DUI law, you have no doubt heard about the United States Supreme Court decision in Missouri v. McNeely, 133 S.Ct. 1552 (2013). The case deals with when, and under what circumstances the government is required to seek a warrant prior to drawing blood from a suspected DUI offender. Below is a quote from the case which provides a reasonable (and short) analysis of the case. If you want to read [Read the full post. . .]
Ohio DUI law R.C. 4511.19(A)(2) enhances the penalty for a motorist who, having been convicted once in the last six (6) years, after having been arrested, refuses to take a blood, breath or urine test. In State v. Hoover,173 Ohio App.3d 487, 2007-Ohio-5773, the issue of whether or not a person can have a DUI sentence enhanced pursuant to R.C. 4511.19(A)(2) for refusing to take a chemical test was before the Ohio Supreme Court. The government sought to [Read the full post. . .]
A warrantless arrest must be supported by probable cause in order to be constitutionally valid. State v. Timson, 38 Ohio St.2d 122, 67 Ohio Op.2d 140, 311 N.E.2d 16 (1974). In order to make a finding that probable (more likely than not) cause existed the court must look at the totality of the circumstances surrounding the arrest. State v. Miller, 117 Ohio App.3d 750, 691 N.E.2d 703 (11th Dist. Court of Appeals 1997), State v. Brandenburg, 41 [Read the full post. . .]