There will be a “No-refusal” OVI checkpoint tonight beginning at 8 p.m. at State Routes 68 and 40 in Springfield, Ohio.
The Dayton Checkpoint (also a No-Refusal) will begin at 11:30 p.m. at Wayne & Wyoming.
A “No Refusal Checkpoint” means that every car will be checked to ensure that drivers are not impaired. If there is sufficient probable cause to believe that a driver is operating a vehicle while impaired, law enforcement will seek a blood search warrant [Read the full post. . .]
The Alcohol Influence Report is a document prepared by the arresting officer noting each and every indicator for alcohol impairment that they took note of in their investigation. Most of the forms require that the officer simply check the predetermined indicator. Not surprisingly, all the officer’s observations fall neatly into these predetermined areas. The report is a document of the officers opinions and should not be considered routine ministerial reports of a non-adversarial nature. Clearly, letting the jury have this [Read the full post. . .]
Driving Is A Right!
Have you ever been told that “driving is a privilege?” Bah! This author argues that the DUI case law needs to be expanded to include “driving” as a fundamental right under the First Amendment’s Freedom of Assembly. Thus, the analysis should be under the substantive due process analysis not simply under the procedural due process analysis. Because the human rights of freedom of movement, right to earn a living and the right to peaceably assemble are [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. . .]
In State v. French, 72 Ohio St. 3d 446, 1995-Ohio-32, 646 N.E. 2d 887 (1995), the Ohio Supreme Court held that a pretrial motion to suppress is the only way to challenge the admissibility of a chemical test. If not filed, the results will be automatically admissible at trial. The prosecuting attorney will not need to lay a foundation and any objection by the defense as to their admission will be overruled by the judge. This makes choosing an [Read the full post. . .]