Posts Tagged ‘centerville ohio dui’

Motorcycle DUI – NHTSA Targets Motorcyclists for DUI Enforcement

June 3rd, 2013

NHTSA Devotes Time And Dollars To Study Motorcycle DUI

I liked this one

It is summer time and the perfect time to get out on the road.  If you ride a motorcycle, you may notice that law enforcement is paying you a a lot of attention. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), motorcyclists involved in fatal crashes are 2.5 times more likely to have consumed alcohol than passenger vehicle drivers.  In 2007, the number of alcohol-impaired motorcyclists in fatal crashes increased by 10 percent while the number of alcohol-impaired drivers of passenger cars declined 6 percent.  (NHTSA defines “alcohol impaired” for vehicle operators over 21 with Blood Alcohol Content (BAC) measured over the 50-state legal limit of 0.08 grams/deciliter.)  Because of these statistics, NHTSA and law enforcement  have singled out the riding community for targeted DUI enforcement efforts.  Each year brings a more concentrated effort to detect impaired motorcyclists.

In the mid-90s, NHTSA conducted focus groups of 70 men and 15 women who admitted they drank and rode motorcycles.  Judge for yourself if NHTSA was fair in its representation of motorcyclists.  For example, one motorcyclist from Denver said a little alcohol improved his riding.  “I know that when I ride and I have a beer it feels better riding. It loosens you up – it relieves tension,” he said, “It feels more exciting riding. You enjoy your ride better if you have one beer.”  ”If you don’t fall down within the first few feet, you’re going to be okay,” said the rider from Denver, “I’ve seen guys do that. There’s something about being on a motorcycle – you focus yourself. When you get on your motorcycle and hit the road, the wind and the air just seem to go, “Boom, I’m okay now.”  Another rider from Boston concurred.  “If they’re totally wasted, then you worry about their safety,” he said, “If they’re just a little bit wasted then it’s, ‘Watch out for the cops.’”

The National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) has also developed a guide specific to motorcycle operators.  The basis of this motorcycle guide are based on a 1993 study, The Detection of DWI Motorcyclists, DOT HS 807 839, March 1993; Jack W. Stuster, Anacapa Sciences Inc., wherein police reports were used to identify “cues” of impaired drivers.  Over 100 “cues” were narrowed down to 14.  NHTSA lables 7 of these “cues” as “excellent” predictors of impairment and 7 are considered “good” predictors of impairment.  According to NHTSA “excellent” is defined as having a greater than 50% predictive capability.  ”Good” means that the tests are 30-50% predictive (much less than a coin toss).

The “cues” that police officers look for when investigating impaired motorcycle operators are:

Excellent Cues (50% or greater probability)

  • Drifting during a turn or curve
  • Trouble with a dismount
  • Trouble with balance at a stop
  • Turning problems (unsteady, sudden corrections, late breaking, improper lean angle)
  • Inattentive to surroundings
  • Inappropriate or unusual behavior (carrying or dropping and object, urinating at roadside, disorderly conduct)
  • Weaving
Good Cues (30-49% probability)
  • Erratic movement while going straight
  • Operating without lights at night
  • Recklessness
  • Following too closely
  • Running stop light or sign
  • Evasion
  • Wrong way
The guide does not tie the cues to any correlated BAC.  Instead it simply uses the cues to say that a driver is “DWI” without defining what that means in terms of BAC or impairment.  Another glaring problem with the study is the fact that experienced police officers do not think it is valid.  At page three the guide states, “…some officers, even those with many years of experience reported they believe there are no cues that can be used to distinguish DWI from unimpaired motorcycle operation.”

DUI attorney Charles M. Rowland II dedicates his practice to defending the accused drunk driver in Fairborn, Dayton, Springfield, Kettering, Vandalia, Xenia, Miamisburg, Springboro, Huber Heights, Oakwood, Beavercreek, Centerville and throughout Ohio.  He has the credentials and the experience to win your case and has made himself the Miami Valley’s choice for DUI defense.  Contact Charles Rowland by phone at 937-318-1DUI (937-318-1384), 937-879-9542, or toll-free at 1-888-ROWLAND (888-769-5263).  For after-hours help contact our 24/7 DUI HOTLINE at 937-776-2671.  For information about Dayton DUI sent directly to your mobile device, text DaytonDUI (one word) to 50500.  Follow DaytonDUI on Twitter @DaytonDUI or Get Twitter updates via SMS by texting DaytonDUI to 40404. DaytonDUI is also available on Facebook and on the DaytonDUI channel on YouTube.  You can also email Charles Rowland at: CharlesRowland@DaytonDUI.com or write to us at 2190 Gateway Dr., Fairborn, Ohio 45324.

 

Dayton DUI Answers The Question, “Should I Blow?”

May 22nd, 2013

To blow or not to blow, that is the question.  Unfortunately, the answer is “maybe” and involves a very complicated investigation of the facts of your case and your personal history.  You should NEVER refuse the test without understanding how a refusal would affect YOU.  No attorney can know all of the circumstances of your arrest and your personal history, always ask to speak to an attorney when making this decision.

Can you answer “TRUE” to ALL of the following questions? If so, you can politely DECLINE any police test(s) of your blood, breath, or urine with minimum impact.  Be prepared and know your rights.

a. I am an Ohio license holder, 21 years or older; AND

b. I was not involved in an accident involving possible death or to serious injury to ANYBODY, even members of my family, pedestrians or passengers; AND

c. I do not have a commercial driver’s license (CDL); AND

d. No matter where I currently have a license to drive, I have had no prior drunk driving convictions or deferred pleas for DUI in ANY state within 6 years (from the date of conviction until now).

Refusing a chemical test can result in harsh penalties which includes a one-year license suspension, but your attorney can fight to get this reduced.  In some courts your refusal may be held strictly against you and in others you may be able to get a reduced suspension despite your refusal.  In State v. Hill, 2009-Ohio-2468, the Appellate Court upheld the right of a trial court to enhance a penalty based on a refusal to take the chemical test. In most circumstances, a refusal to take a chemical test will result in a longer hard-time suspension (30 days rather than 15 days without any driving privileges). [see the Automatic License Suspension section of this blog].  You should also engage in an honest assessment of your alcohol consumption. If you risk testing over Ohio’s “super-OVI” threshold (over a .17% BAC) you may do harm by taking the test.  Take these factors into account when making your decision to blow or not to blow.

Any criminal defense attorney would rather have less evidence against you rather than more, but giving blanket advice to refuse the chemical test is a mistake.  Be prepared to make the best decision for you.  You can also plan ahead by storing my contact information in your smart phone: (937)776-2671.

Contact Charles Rowland by phone at 937-318-1DUI (937-318-1384), 937-879-9542, or toll-free at 1-888-ROWLAND (1-888-769-5263).  For after-hours help contact our 24/7 DUI HOTLINE at 937-776-2671.Immediate help is available by filling out the CONTACT form on any of these pages.  For information about Dayton DUI sent directly to your mobile device, text DaytonDUI (one word) to 50500.  Follow DaytonDUI on Twitter at www.Twitter.com/DaytonDUI or Get Twitter updates via SMS by texting follow DaytonDUI to 40404. DaytonDUI is also available on Facebook and you can access updates by becoming a fan of Dayton DUI/OVI Defense.  You can also email Charles Rowland at: CharlesRowland@DaytonDUI.com or write to us at 2190 Gateway Dr., Fairborn, Ohio 45324.

 

Gas Chromatography Mass Spectrometry (An Overview)

April 3rd, 2013

gcms wikipediaTo fully comprehend the processes of chemical testing, your DUI attorney should understand gas chromatography – mass spectrometry. Gas chromatography mass spectrometry (hereinafter GCMS)  is a method that combines the features of gas-liquid chromatography and mass spectrometry to identify different substances within a test sample.  GC-MS has been widely heralded as a “gold standard” for forensic substance identification because it is used to perform a specific test.

Ohio Administrative Code 3701-53-03(A) sets forth the techniques and methods for determining the concentration of alcohol in blood, urine and other bodily substances.  Pursuant to that rule, Ohio allows for testing including gas chromatography and enzyme assays.  The GCMS instrument is made up of two parts. The gas chromatography (GC) portion separates the chemical mixture into pulses of pure chemicals and the mass spectrometer (MS) identifies and quantifies the chemicals.  The GC separates chemicals based on their volatility, or ease with which they evaporate into a gas. It is similar to a running race where a group of people begin at the starting line, but as the race proceeds, the runners separate based on their speed. The chemicals in the mixture separate based on their volatility. In general, small molecules travel more quickly than larger molecules.  The MS is used to identify chemicals based on their structure.

In order to successfully defend a blood test case, a DUI defense lawyer must be familiar with Ohio’s DUI law (O.R.C. 4511.19) and the Ohio Administrative Code sections which apply to the collection, storing, transporting and testing of the whole blood, blood plasma and/or blood serum specimen.  Amphetamine, cocaine, heroine, Marijuana, Methamphetamine, Phencyclidine and L.S.D. are specifically mentioned in Ohio’s DUI/OVI statute as illegal controlled substances. The law states how much of each substance must be detected in a chemical test of urine, whole blood, blood plasma, and/or blood serum in order to sustain a charge.  A blood test is seen as the most accurate and reliable method of testing but is the most invasive.  The blood test is increasingly favored by law enforcement officers because it allows them to expand the parameters of their suspicion to include illicit and prescription drugs. Sometimes the blood test will be requested after a breath test produces a result under the .08% BAC limit.  If this is the case, your attorney should employ more traditional factual defenses such as a lack of probable cause to suspect drug use before leaping to a more scientific challenge to the collection, storage, transporting or testing of the blood sample.  If the facts support a blood test then your attorney must hold the State to its proof.

Charles M. Rowland II, DaytonDUI, is a member of the National College for DUI Defense and has attended the National Mastering Scientific Evidence seminar on multiple occasions.  He is the only attorney in Ohio to hold a certificate in Forensic Sobriety Assessment.  His commitment to understanding and winning through the use of science has made him the Miami Valley’s choice for DUI Defense. For the last seven years, Charles has focused exclusively on the complex field of DUI defense. Charles has spoken and written about DUI and is the only attorney in Ohio to hold a Forensic Sobriety Assessment certification.  Don’t you want an attorney who will defend you with the same “by any means necessary” mentality that Ohio has adopted with which to secure your conviction?  I dedicate my practice to defending the accused drunk driver in the following jurisdictions: FairbornDaytonSpringfieldKetteringVandaliaXeniaMiamisburgSpringboro,Huber HeightsOakwoodBeavercreekCenterville and throughout Ohio.  He has the credentials and the experience to win your case and has made himself the Miami Valley’s choice for DUI defense.  Contact me by phone at 937-318-1DUI (937-318-1384), 937-879-9542, or toll-free at 1-888-ROWLAND (888-769-5263).  For after-hours help contact our 24/7 DUI HOTLINE at 937-776-2671.  For information about Dayton DUI sent directly to your mobile device, text DaytonDUI (one word) to 50500.  Follow DaytonDUI on Twitter @DaytonDUI or Get Twitter updates via SMS by texting DaytonDUI to40404. DaytonDUI is also available on Facebook and on the DaytonDUI channel on YouTube.  You can also email me at: CharlesRowland@DaytonDUI.com or write to us at 2190 Gateway Dr., Fairborn, Ohio 45324. “All I do is DUI

DUI Science and Blood Contamination

March 27th, 2013

Blood Sweat and Tears. Number 2

The practice of modern DUI law involves understanding the various scientific tests that have become commonplace in forensic collection and storage of specimens for alcohol analysis.  Specifically, DUI attorneys must understand that contamination can increase the concentration of ethanol in a specimen.  Typically, contamination takes one of two forms.  The first is straight-forward physical contamination which may manifest itself before, during or after collection.  The second form of contamination occurs when microorganisms contaminate a sample and produce ethanol in the sample thereby falsely inflating the amount of ethanol therein.  This article will focus on the physical contamination that may cause an ethanol gain.

“A recognized source of physical contamination is the use of alcohol containing swabs to disinfect the area of specimen collection in the living patient.  This method of specimen contamination is well documented in the literature (Heise, 1959; Taberner, 1989; Goldfinger and Schaber 1982).  Medical-Legal Aspects of Alchol, 4th ed., edited by James C. Garriott, pp237-248.  Most hospital protocols call for the use of an aqueous providone iodine solution that can avoid this form of physical contamination. Id. citing (Ryder and Glick, 1986).

In situations involving trauma, your attorney should investigate whether or not the specimen may have been contaminated via a transthoracic puncture of blind external chest stick.  This type of contamination can take place in cases of trauma or death.  The attorney should look for contamination via cardiac fluid or contamination by contact with stomach contents. Id. (Logan and Lindholm (1996) and Winek et al. (1995).  In postmortem situations, collection of a specimen can be physically contaminated if the introduction of volatile embalming fluids are present prior to the collection of the sample. Id. (Newbar and Myers, 1954).  Our office has made use of legal nurse consultants to identify potential sources of contamination due to emergency procedures.

Dayton DUI attorney Charles M. Rowland II is Ohio’s only Forensic Sobriety Assessment certified attorney and has attended the National College for DUI Defense’s Mastering Science Seminar on multiple occasions.  He has lectured on DUI science and has earned a reputation as an accomplished trial attorney.   Charles M. Rowland II dedicates his practice to defending the accused drunk driver in Fairborn, Springfield, Kettering, Vandalia, Xenia, Miamisburg, HuberHeights, Beavercreek, Centerville, Springboro, Franklin and throughout Ohio.  He has the credentials and the experience to win your case and has made himself the Miami Valley’s choice for DUI defense.  Contact Charles Rowland by phone at 937-318-1DUI (937-318-1384), 937-879-9542, or toll-free at 1-888-ROWLAND (888-769-5263).  For after-hours help contact our 24/7 DUI HOTLINE at 937-776-2671.  For information about Dayton DUI sent directly to your mobile device, text DaytonDUI (one word) to 50500.  Follow DaytonDUI on Twitter @DaytonDUI or Get Twitterupdates via SMS by texting DaytonDUI to 40404. DaytonDUI is also available on Facebook,www.facebook.com/daytondui and on the DaytonDUI channel on YouTube.  You can also email Charles Rowland at: CharlesRowland@DaytonDUI.com or write to us at 2190 Gateway Dr., Fairborn, Ohio 45324.

Kettering OVI Attorney

March 19th, 2013

English: The entrance gate into Fraze Pavilion...

If you have been arrested for OVI in Centerville, KetteringMoraine or Washington Township, your misdemeanor OVI case will be heard in the Kettering Municipal Court.  If you need to find information about a case in the Kettering Municipal Court you can search HERE for case information/case look-up, or visit the court’s web site HERE.

Charles M. Rowland II has represented the accused drunk driver in the Kettering Municipal Court since 1995 and dedicates his practice to OVI law.  He has some of the most impressive credentials for OVI attorneys in the state of Ohio that you can review HERE.  If you find yourself in need of a criminal defense attorney in the Kettering Municipal Court, contact Kettering DUI Attorney Charles M. Rowland II today!

I am a DUI/OVI attorney, representing the accused drunk driver in the Miami Valley and throughout Ohio. Here you will find information to fight your case and get your life back! You can talk with me right now, or arrange a free consultation by calling 937-318-1DUI or 1-888-ROWLAND. “ALL I DO IS DUI DEFENSE